


■^ r '^>.i ^r - ■ .■>f* 






T. 






^^' ^ 









<> 






'^^^ 






rO- 



\^ 












^ '^ \%^./ .</ % 



'f 






^ .0^^ 
G^ 









% 



<> 



.^^ 



lN^ 












^^^ 

.%%. 



Q. '', 



V 






.^ 






%.,x^^ 






cV 












^ '^ -r^.^ cP\-;::',-% 









■'^^ 0^ 






.^^ ^^ 



o- 



- "v. 






* 









^ 






' . * s ^ _^0 






rO^ 



<. 



^^0^ 









^' 



^V 



V> 



'^ V 



,^^ ^^^ 



o.^^ 



.^^ ^^. 






<, 






X.^^' 



'^<P 



<. 






e 



■0^ 






o.^ 









aO 






^^0^ 



'"-c: 



,-^^ 









V 



9.;'^c:>\n^ 



v^^^ 

r.^^ ^ 






THE 



AMERICAN SLAVE CODE 



IN THEORY AND PRACTICE: 



DISTINCTIVE FEATUKES 



ITS STATUTES, JUDICIAL DECISIONS, 



ILLUSTRATIVE FACT^r^ OF C(V: 



«tTrutU U stranger than Fiction."— (.Vo<icrH .Uui-im.) s^ 

«t SUtutes against Fundamental Moral.ty are vou1."-(J«rf,'f .Vi.««>^Ki^Kpr»w Co*"-) 



WILLIAM GOODELL; 

of the "Democracy of Christianity," and "History of Sh,very and AnU-Slavery.' 



NEW-YORK : 
AMERICAN AND FOREIGN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY. 

4 8 U E E K M A .N- S T 11 E E T . 
185 3. 



E^ 



Entered according to Act ct Consress, in the year 1853. by 

WILLIAM GOODELL, 

In the Clerk-o Office of tUe District Court of tbe United States for tia 
Sovi-.hern District of New-Tork. 



\ 



'^ 



A\ 



A^ 



JOHN A. GRAY, 

^rinltr, 
95 & 07 Cliir. cor. Frankfort Street. 



• ^ • « ^ 



:i^o 



li 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 



Preliminary. Chapter, 15 



P A E T I. 
The EKLATio>i of Master and Slave, 21 

CHAPTER L 
slave ownership. 

Fundamental idea of modern Slaveholdiiig, niim<;ly, the assumed principle of 
Human Cliattelhood, or Property in Man, constituting the relation of Owner 
and Property, of Master and Slave, 23 

CEAPTER II. 

SLAVE TRAFFIC. 

Sate— Purchase — Barter — Mortgage — Auction— Coflle-gang — Shipments— as 
absolutely as in the case of any other Property, and by the same tenure, . . 44 

CEAPTER III. 

SEIZURE OF SLAVE PROPERTY FOR DEBT. 

As Property, Slaves may be seized and sold to pay the debts of their Owners, 
while living, or for the Settlement of their Estates after their Decease, 63 

CEAPTER IV. 

INHERITANCE OF SLAVE PROPERTY. 

Slaves, as Property, are transmitted by Inheritance, or by Will, to heirs at law 
or legatees. In the distribution of Estates they are distributed like other 
Property, C9 



IV CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER V. 

USES OF SLAVE PROPERTT. 

Slaves, as Property, may be used, absolutely, by their Owners, for their own 
profit or pleasure, TI 



CHAPTER YI. 

SLAVES CAN POSSESS XOTHIXG. 
Being Property themselves, they can own no property, nor make any contract, 69 



cmvPTER vn. 



SLAVES CANNOT MARRY. 



Being held as Property, and incapable of making any Contract, they cannot 
contract Marriage recognized by law, 



CHAPTER Vni. 

SLAVES CANNOT CONSTITUTE FAMIUES. 

Being Property,—*' Goods and Chattels Personal, to all intents, constructions, 
and purposes whatsoever,"— Ihey have no claim on each oilier ; no security 
from separation ; no Marital Rights; no Parental Righla; no Family Gov- 
ernment ; no Family Education ; no Family Protection, 113 



CHAPTER IX. 

UNLIMITED POWER OF SLAVEHOLDERS. 

The Power of the Master or Owner is virtually unlimited ; the submission 
required of the Slave is unbounded ; the Slave, bein? Property, can have 
no Protection against the Master, and has no redress for injuries inllicted by 
him, 122 



CU.VPTER X. 

LABOR OF SLAVES. 

The Slave, being a Chattel, may be worked at the discretion of his Owner, as 
other working Chattels are, 128 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER XL 



FOOD, CLOTHINa, AND DWELLINGS OF SLAVES. 
The Slave, as a Chatlel, is fed or famished, covered or uncovered, sheltered or 
uushelie'red, at the discretion or convenience of his Owner, like other work- 

135 

lug auimuls, 



CHAPTER Xn. 

COERCED LABOR WITHOUT WAGES. 
The "le-al relation of Master and Slave," being the relation of an Owner to 
a Chattel, isfhcompaiible with the natural and Heaven-sanctioned "relation" 

, ,,. loO 

of Labor and U ages, 



CHAPTER XHT. 

PUNISHMENTS OF SLAVES BY THE OWNER AND HIRER. 
Being the absolute Property of the Owner, the Slave is wholly in his power, ^^_ 
without any effectual restraint, 

CHAPTER XrV. 

OF LAWS CONCERNING THE MURDER AND KILLING OF SLAVES. 

177 



The structure of the Laws and the condition of the Slaves render adequate 



Protection impossible, 

CHAPTER XV. 

OF THE DELEGATED POWER OF OVERSEERS. 
All the power of the Owner over his Slave is held and exercised also by Over- ^^^ 
seers and Agents, 

CHAPTER XVI. 

OF THE PROTECTION OF SLAVE PROPERTY FROM DAMAGE BY 

ASSAULTS FROM OTHER PERSONS THAN THEIR OWNERS. 
Slaves are better protected as Froperty than they are as SmlUnt Beings, 201 



VI CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER XVII. 

FACTS ILLrSTRATIXG THE KIND AND DEGREE OF PROTECTION 
EXTENDED TO SLAVES. 

The Extent, the Atrocity, the Frequency, and the Impunity of barbarous Out- 
rages ujion Slaves, sho\j that the laws aflford them little or uo Protection, 209 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

FUGITIVES FROM SLAVERY. 

The Slave, being Property, may be hampered and confliied to i)revo9t his es- 
cape; may be ))ursued and reclaimed; must not be aided or concealed 
from his Master; and when loo wild or refractory to be used by his Owner, 
may be killed by him with impunity, 225 



CHxVPTER XIX. 

THE SLAVE CANNOT SUE HIS MASTER. 
Slave Property cannot litigate with its Owner, 239 

CHAPTER XX. 

NO POWER OF SELF-REDEMPTION OR CHANGE OF MASTERS. 

The Slave, being a Chattel, has no power of Self-redemption, nor of an ex- 
change of Owners, 243 

CHAPTER XXI. 

THE RELATION HEREDITARY AND PERPETUAL, 

Slaves, being held as Properly, like other Domestic Animals, their Offspring 
arc held as Property in tbes:une manner, 248 

CHAPTER XXII. 

RIGHT TO EDUCATION RELIGIOUS LIBERTY RIGHTS OF 

CONSCIENCE. 

The Slave, being held as a Chattel, is held by a tenure which excludes any legal 
recognition of his rights as a thinlsiiig and religious being, 251 



CONTENTS. VU 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

ORIGIN' OF THE RELATION AND ITS SUBJECTS. 

The so-c:ilk'd "legal relation" of Slave Ownership of Negroes originated in 
that African Slave-Trade which our laws now punish as piracy ; but Slavery 
is, in general, extended over all classes whom the Slaveholders have been 
able to seize ujjou and retain — over Indians, free persons of Color, and 
Whites, 258 



P A E T II. 

Relation of the Slave to Society and to Civil Govern- 
ment, 287 

CHAPTER I. 

OF THE GROUND AND NATURE OF THE SLAVe's CIVIL CONDITION. 

The Civil Condition of the Slave grows out of his relation to his Master, as 
Property, and is determined and defined by it, 289 



CHAPTER II. 

NO ACCESS TO THE JUDICIARY, AND NO HONEST PROVISION FOR 
TESTING THE CLAIMS OF THE ENSLAVED TO FREEDOM. 

" A Slave cannot be a Party to a Civil Suit." (Stroud.) 295 



CHAPTER HI. 

BEJECTION OF TESTIMONY OF SLAVES AND FREE COLORED 
PERSONS. 

Slavery Is upheld by suppressing the testimony of its Tictims, 30O 



YIU CONTENTS. 

CnAl^TER IV. 

SUBJECTION TO ALL "WHITE PERSOXS. 

Submission is required of llic Slave, not only to Ihe will of his Master, but 
to the will 01' all oilicr ly/iite Fcnons ! '' 305 



CHAPTER V. 

PENAL LAWS AGAINST SLAVES. 

The Laws are unequal ; Iheir administration despoiic: their execution barbar- 
ous. Even this is exceeded by "Lynch Law," 309 



CHAPTER VI. 

EDUCATION PROHIBITED. 

The Slave, not being regarded as a Member of Society, nor as a Human Be- 
ing, the Government, instead of providing for his Kducaliou, takes care to 
forbid it, as being inconsislenl « ith the coudiliou of CuUelhuod, 3 19 



CHAPTER VII. 

FREE SOCIAL WORSHIP AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION PROHIB- 
ITED. 

The Government not only allows the Master to forbid the Free Social Wor- 
ship and Inslruclion of his Slaves, but il also steps in with direct prohibi- 
tions of its own, which even the Blaster himself may not relax or abrogate, 3i6 



CHAPTER VIII. 

LEGISLATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND CONSTITUTIONAL OBSTRUCTIONS 
TO EMANCIPATION. 

The Statutes of the Slave States not only make no provision for a general 
Emancipation, but Ihey obstruct and prevent Emancipations by the Master. 
And the Constitutions of some of the Slates forbid the Legislatures to abol- 
ish Slavery, 334 



CONTENTS. ix 

P A E T III. 

Relation of the Slave Code to the Liberties of the 
Free, 353 

CHAPTER I. 

liberties of the free people of color. 

The free People of Color, though not in a condition of ChattelhoocI, are con- 
Btautly exposed to it, and, at best, enjoy only a portion of their rights, .... 3.15 

CHAPTER H. 

liberties of the white people of the slaveholdixg 
states. 

The AVhite People of the Slaveholding States, whether Slaveholders or Non- 
Slaveholder;', are deprived, by the Slave Code, of some of their essential 
Right?, and cannot be regarded as a people in possession of Civil, Religious 
and Political Freedom, .... 372 



CHAPTER HI. 

LIBERTIES OF THE WHITE PEOPLE OF THE NON-SLAVEIIOLDING 
STATES. 

The Rights of the White People of the Non-Slaveholding States are directly 
and indirectly invaded by the Slave Code of the Slave States ; their Liber- 
ties, to a great extent, have already fallen a sacrifice, and can never be 
secure while Slaveholding continues, 389 



CONCLUDING CHAPTER. 

Summary Review of the Slave Code; its Cliaructer and Eflects— Inquiries 
concerning the Duty of Christians, Churches, and Ministers — The Respon- 
sibilities of Citizens, of Society, of Civil Government, of Legislators, of 
Magistrates — Scrutiny of the Legality of American Slavery — Tlie Heaven- 
prescribed Remedy— The W( rthlessncss of Temporizing Expedients— Clos- 
ing Appeal, 394 



1* 



LETTER FROM HON. WILLIAM JAY TO THE AUTHOR. 



New-Yokk, 25th January, 1853. 
Rev. axd Dear Sir : 

On returning the ]\1SS. of your "American Slave Code, in Theory 
and Practice" I must ask you to accept my thanks for writing it, 
as well as for favoring me with its early perusal. Surely, never 
before has mischief been framed by law with more diabolical inge- 
nuity than in this infernal code. Your analysis of the slave laws 
is very able, and j-our exhibition of their practical application by 
the Southern Courts, evinces great and careful research. 

It is more easy to make than to refute a charge of exaggeration 
against a work of fiction like Mrs. Stowe's ; but your book is as 
impregnable against such a chai-ge as is Euclid's Geometry, since, 
like that, it consists of propositions and demonstrations. The 
book is not only true, but it is nnqicestionahly true. You show us 
the rack constructed " according to law ;" we examine, at our lei- 
sure, the cruel but skilful contrivance of its machinery ; we see the 
ministers of the law bind the victim on the instrument of torture ; 
we see one feature of humanity after another crushed and obliter- 
ated, till at last an immortal man, made a little lower than the 
angels, and for whose redemption the Son of God shed his blood ou 
the cross, is converted into a beast of burden — a vendible animal, 
scourged at the will of its owner, and offered for sale in the market 
with horses and oxen. 

Your book will take from our Xorthern dough-faces and slave- 
catchers the flatteiing miction they are laying to their souls that 



LETTER TO THE AUTHOR. 

" Uncle Tom's Cabin " is a gross exaggeration ; that, of course, sla- 
very is, after all, not so \ery bad ; and that they, in doing its bid- 
dings, are not as base as they seem to be. You show tliem that 
the most educated and refined among the slaveholders have, for 
the past century, as legislators, been deliberately enacting the most 
fiendish of laws, in utter defiance of the moral sense of mankind, 
and the precepts of the blessed gospel of the Lord Jesus; and that 
their grave and learned judges have enforced these accursed stat- 
utes, in all their execrable rigor, thus giving a solemn sanction to 
the atrocities portrayed by Mrs. Stowe and others without num- 
ber, still more aggravated by investing them with legal impunity. 

May God make your book a means of awakening the consciences 
of our cotton divines to the deep sin of upholding, in the name of 
the blessed and adorable Redeemer, a system so damnable as Ame- 
rican Slavery ! These reverend pro-slavery champions of Chris- 
tianity resemble the priests of Juggernaut, recommending the wor- 
ship of their god by pointing to the wretches writhing, and shriek- 
ing, and expiring under his car. 

That the blessing of God may rest on your labors for his glory 
and the good of our sufl'ering and oppressed brethi-en, is the fer- 
vent pra3'er of 

Tour friend and servant, 

T7ILLLVM JAY. 

Rev. Willlvm Goodell. 



THE AMEEICAK SLAYE CODE. 



THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 



PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. 

OCCASIONS AND USES FOR THIS VOLUME. 

The practical importance of an exact knowledge 
of the Slave Code and of its legitimate workings, 
will be manifest from the considerations that follow. 

It is often maintained that the "legal relation of 
master and slave" is not a criminal one, and that 
there is no sin, or moral wrong, in the mere fact of 
sustaining that relation. On the other hand, it is 
held that the relation is wrong in itself, and cannot 
be innocently sustained. 

Such a question cannot, intelligently, be settled 
without a correct understanding of that " legal rela- 
tion," and of the particulars in which it consists. 
And it is only by the Slave Code of the country that 
" the legal relation" can be ascertained. By this, and 
by this only, is it to be defined. " The legal relation 
of master and slave" is what the Slave Code declares 
it to be. And it is nothing else. 

It is worse than mere trifling, it is evasion and 
sophistr}', to ransack the archives of some other age 



16 THE A:\rERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

and nation for the laws and usages wliich then con- 
stituted slavery, or whicli we may now choose to 
call slavery ; and then, on the assumed (or even the 
ascertained) innocency or divine sanction or tolerance 
of tliose usages, to argue the innocency of the exist- 
ing "relation of master and slave" in this country. 
Sincere and honest inquirers are bound to ascertain 
"the legal relation of master and slave" as it now 
exists in America, in virtue of the code that author- 
izes and defines it. They are bound to bring " the 
legal relation," as thus defined and ascertained, to the 
standard of the Divine will, and say to whether or no 
it corresponds with that standard. The question 
whether it is right or wrong to sanction such a " legal 
relation" by "sustaining" it, will then be easily set- 
tled. 

ISTo man, in America, can hold a slave by any other 
tenure, or in any other "relation," than that Avhich 
the American Slave Code describes. lie cannot 
hold a slave under the code of Moses, (if it ever could 
have been done,) nor under the usages of Abraham's 
day, for no such code or usages now exist. If he 
relinquishes the hold on his slave that the American 
Slave Code gives him, he manumits him, at once and 
entirely. Let him do this, or let that code be blotted 
out, and he cannot forcibly retain a man in bondage 
a single day, without becoming a felon in the eye of 
the law. So that in "sustaining the legal relation," 
he sustains and sanctions the code, and its character 
becomes his. The more unsullied his reputation may 
be in other respects, the more effectually does his 



PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. 17 

example of slaveliolding sanctiou the system, and 
rivet the chains of the slave. 

It must be futile and absurd to decry the code, and 
yet attem^Dt to justify him who holds a slave under 
it. The code would harm no one, if no one ever 
made nse of it. The Avorst that can properly be said 
of the code is, that it enables men who are thus dis- 
posed to hold the " relation" described by it. For, 
the very men for whose consideration we make this 
remark are forward to tell ns that the system (in 
other words, the code) is not to be held, resjjonsible 
for the mere abuses committed nnder it. It must, 
then, be responsible for the relation, and those who 
sustain the relation must be responsible for it. 

IVe propose, then, hy an exhibition of the American 
Slave Code, to test the moral character of American slave- 
holding. The practice (in the absence of mere abuses) 
cannot be better than the code, or rule of conduct, 
that gives it license and sanction. 

On the other hand, the usages under any code are 
seldom or never better than the code itself. Com- 
munities are not forward to proclaim themselves 
worse than they are, by giving public license to evil 
practices not prevalent among them, and which they 
do not intend to practise and sustain. " No people," 
says a learned writer and profound thinker,* " were 
ever yet found who were better than their laws, 
though many have been known to be worse." 

The only exceptions to this rule are where bad laws 

* Dr. Priestley. 



18 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

are forced upon a community without their consent ; 
or where, from their odiousness, or by the progress 
of civilization since their enactment, they have be- 
cqme obsolete. " In our own country, the people (ex- 
cept the victims of the Slave Code) enact their own 
statutes. And in the present investigation it Avill be 
made apparent that the Slave Code has not become 
obsolete. 

The present contest for the abolition of American 
slavery has encountered a species of opposition which 
it has been dijQBcult to meet. If existing j)ractices 
are arraigned, we are told that these are only abuses 
of the system, which argue nothing against the inno- 
cent "legal relation." Thus all efforts for the aboli- 
tion of that innocent relation are discountenanced 
and disparaged. At the same time, all adequate, 
trustworthy, and truthful representations of the 
cruelties habitually and extensively practised upon 
slaves, are scouted as incredible or exaggerated. 
Attempts are made to offset them by the cool remark 
that parents are sometimes cruel to their children, 
mechanics to their apprentices, and capitahsts to 
operatives in their employ. To this it is often added 
that, on the whole, slaves are as well off as other 
laboring people, and better off than they would be 
if set free. In this way, the sympathies of the people 
of the North are withdrawn from the slaves. And 
whether we arraign " the legal relation," or the so- 
called " abuses," we find our attacks warded off by 
the arts of sophistry and evasion. Even ministers of 
religion and ecclesiastical bodies have been proficients 



PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. 19 

in these arts, and the friends of liberty themselves 
have thereby been led, in some instances, to make 
unAvise and unfortunate concessions. 

In this book we shall endeavor to show what "the 
legal relation" is; what the usages of slaveholders 
generally are; and the natural and necessary cor- 
respondence and connection between them. In 
describing the "legal relation," we shall use the 
testimony of slaveholders themselves, in their own 
language, set forth in the most solemn and authen- 
ticated form, the public testimony of their legislative 
acts and judicial decisions, made for the very purpose 
of defining and enforcing that relation. If such tes- 
timony cannot be received, there is an end to all 
rational discussion. Our account of the usao'es and 
practices current among slaveholders will be found 
sufficiently authenticated by their own testimony, 
and by other unimpeachable witnesses. More than 
all this : The intelligent and reflecting reader will 
be compelled, if we mistake not, to perceive that the 
connection between " the legal relation" and the most 
frightful " abuses" is that of cause and effect, or more 
properly, of a "whole with its constituent and essen- 
tial PARTS, insomuch that the presence of the one 
implies and certifies the presence of the other. 

In speaking (as we are compelled by the prevail- 
ing use of language to do) of "the legal relation," 
of the "laws" of slavery and of slave "owners," we 
must not be understood to concede the "legality" of 
such a relation, or the validity of such " laws," or 
the reahty of such " ownership," in the proper mean- 



20 THE AMERia^' SLAVE CODE. 

ing of those terms. The "law of sin and death" is 
not obhgatoiy law. "Mischief framed bj a law" 
binds men to nothing but to the repudiation and con- 
tempt of it. " If it be found," says Lord Littleton, 
" that a former decision is manifestly absurd and 
unjust, it is declared, not that such a sentence was 
had law, but that it was not law." "It is generally 
laid down that acts of Parliament contrary to reason 
are void." Of the character and validity of the Slave 
Code the reader of this volume will have an oppor- 
tunity to judge, when he shall have carefully ex- 
amined and considered it. 



N. B. — It is sometimes alleged that the severe laws against the 
education and free religious worship of slaves were occasioned by 
the impertinent interference of abolitionists. But it will be found, 
on an examination of their dates, that, with few exceptions, they 
were enacted long before any of the Abolition Societies were formed, 
and even before the American Revolution. 

On the other hand, it is somelimes said that these and other 
severe enactments are antiquated and obsolete. It is marvellous 
to see with how much confidence these self-confuting statements 
are made by the same persons. Tlie careful reader of the follow- 
ing pages will find ample evidence that both these pleas are with- 
out a shadow of foundation. 



PART I. 



THE RELATIOJS" OF IVIASTER AND SLAVE. 



CHAPTER 1. 

SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 

Fundamental Idea of modern Slaveholding ; namely, the assumed principle of 
Human Chattelhood, or Property in Man ; constituting the relation of Owner 
and Property — of Master and Slave. 

South Carolina. — "Slaves shall be deemed, 
sold, taken, reputed and adjudged in law to be cliat- 
tels personal, in tlie liands of tlieir owners and posses- 
sors, and tlieir executors, administrators and assigns, 
to all intents, constructions, and purposes ivliatsoever.^'' (2 
Brevard's Digest, 229 ; Prince's Digest, 446, &c., &c.) 

Louisiana. — " A slave is one wlio is in tbe power 
of a master to whom he belongs. Tlie master may 
sell him, dispose of his person, liis industry and his 
labor. He can do nothing, p^ossess nothing, nor acquire 
any thing, but what must belong to his master." 
(Civil Code, Art. 35.) 

" Tlie slave is entirely subject to the icillofhis master, 
who may correct and chastise him, though not with 
unusual rigor, or so as to maim and mutilate him, or 
expose him to the danger of loss of life, or to cause 
his death." (Art. 173.) 

It will be foand, as we proceed, that this attempted 



24 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

or pretended limitation of power lias no real exist- 
ence, and affords no protection to the slave. 

An exception, in Louisiana, to the general tenure 
of " chattels personal," is expressed as follows : 

"Slaves, though movable by their nature, are 
considered as imviovaUe by the operation of law." 
(Civil Code, Art. ttGl.) 

" Slaves shall always be reputed and considered 
real estate ; shall, as such, be subject to be mortgaged, 
according to the rules prescribed by law, and they 
shall be seized and sold as real estate.^'' (Statute of 
June 7, 1806 ; 1 Martin's Digest, 612.) 

This provision, if literally carried into effect, would 
prevent the sale of slaves from off the plantations 
of their masters. More of this in its proper place, 

Kentucky. — B}^ the laic of descents^ slaves are con 
sidered real estate, and pass in consequence to heirs^ 
and not to executors. (2 Littell & Swigert's Digest, 
1155.) 

From the following it appears, however, tliat spe- 
cial care was taken in Kentucky, that the slaves 
should derive no benefit from the distinction between 
real estate and chattels personal : 

They are, however, liable, as chattels, to be sold by 
the master at his pleasure, and may be taken in exe- 
cution for the i^ayment of his debts. (lb ; see also 
1247.) 

Virginia. — In 1705 a law similar to that of Ken- 
tucky was enacted, but was soon after repealed. 
(Note to Revised Code, 432.) Slaves are therefore 
held as chattels j^ersonal in Virginia, as in most of the 



iV 



SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 25 

slave States, wliere, in the absence of entire ivritten 
codes, or such general enunciations as those of South 
Carohna and Louisiana, the chattel principle has, 
nevertheless, been affirmed and maintained by the 
courts, and involved in legislative acts. A specimen 
of the latter description we have in the following : 

Maryland, — "In case the personal property of a 
ward shall consist of specific articles, such as SLAVES, 

WORKING BEASTS, ANIMALS of any kind, STOCK, FUR- 
NITURE, plate, books, and so forth, the Court, if it 
shall deem it advantageous to the ward, ma}^, at any 
time, pass an order /or the sale thereof, ^^ &c., &c. (Act 
of 1798, chap. CI. No. 12.) 

Without further citation (as might be made) of 
particular enactments in this place, it may be suffi- 
cient to state that the " Eoman civil law," as existing 
at an early period, before its modification under pro- 
fessedly Christian Emperors, is generally referred to 
in our slave States, as containing the principles of 
their " peculiar institution." "Where other usages or 
statutes, in any of the States, fail of furnishing the 
requisite definition of the " legal relation," recourse 
is generally had to the " Roman civil law." Those 
also who defend the " legal relation" as an innocent 
one, and who claim that Christ and his apostles did 
not disapprove it, but gave it their sanction, are for- 
ward to remind us that it existed in the Roman Em- 
pire at that period. It seems desirable, therefore, in 
more aspects than one, to ascertain precisely what 
that relation was. We find that information in Dr. 
Taylor's Elements of the Civil Law. 



26 TUE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

"Slaves were held ^ro nullis: irro mortuis, pro qua- 
dnipedibm; they had no head in the State ; no name, 
title or register ; they ivere not capable of being mjured, 
nor could they take by purchase or descent ; they had 
no heirs, and could therefore make no will ; exclu- 
sive of what was called their pecuUum, whatever they 
acquired was their master's ; they could not plead or 
be pleaded for, but were excluded from all civil con- 
cerns whatever. They could not claim the indul- 
gence of absence reipiiblicoi causa: they were not en- 
titled to the rights and considerations of matrimony, and 
therefore had no rehef in case of adulter}^ ; nor were 
they proper objects of cognation and affinity, but of 
quasi-cognation only : they could be sold, transferred, 
or pawned as goods or personal estate, for goods they 
were, and as such they were esteemed ; they might 
be tortured for evidence, punished at the discretion of 
their lord, or even ptut to death by his authority.'''' (Tay- 
lor's Elements, p. 429.) 

Such was the "legal relation" said to have been 
sanctioned by Christ and his apostles as innocent, or 
(as others express it) not condemned, thsapproved 
or censured by them. Such Avas the heathen " insti- 
tution" now held to have been adopted as Christian. 
It must be added that the ancient heathen "relation" 
of owner and property has been more rigidly enforced 
in Christian America than it ever was in Pagan Rome. 
Our slaverv allows no p)eculium or exempted prop- 
erty to be held by the slave. It denies education and 
literature to its human brutes. It ignores their reli- 
gious nature, and bars the door of redemption and 



SLAVE OAVNEIISUIP. 27 

release. But wc anticipato topics of future exaiui- 
uation. 

The testimony already presented is corroborated 
by jurists "who have examined the subject. Judge 
Stroud, in his " Sketch of the Laws relating to Slav- 
ery," has fully expressed his views on this point. 
Having explained the maxim of the civil law, "par- 
tus sequitur ventrem," by which the condition of the 
slave mother is for ever entailed on all her remotest 
posterity, he remarks as follows : 

"This maxim of the civil law, the genuine and 
degrading principle of slavery, inasmuch as it places 
the slave upon a level with brute animals, prevails 
universally in the slaveholding States." (Stroud's 
Sketch, p. 11.) 

The same writer also says : 

" It is plain that the dominion of the master is as 
unlimited as that which is tolerated by the laws of 
any civilized country in relation to brute animals — 
to quadrvpeds^ to use the words of the civil law." 
(Stroud's Sketch, p. 24.) 

" The cardinal principle of slavery — ^that the slave 
is not to be ranked among sentient beings, but among 
things^ as an article of property, a chattel personal — 
obtains as undoubted law, in all these (the slave- 
holding) States." (lb. pp. 22, 23.) 

This, then, is the definition of the terms, Slavery, 
Slave, and Slaveholding, as furnished by slavehold- 
ing communities, and as understood by jurists who 
have studied their legislation and jurisprudence. 
This is the theory of American Slavery. This is its 



28 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

fundamental Luav, if it lias any. This is the "legal 
relation of master and slave," if there be any such 
relation. 

The next point of inquiry is, Whether these defi- 
nitions correspond with existing realities, or facts ? 
Whether this theory is an empty abstraction; or 
whether it is carried out into actual practice? 
Whether this law is merely a nominal one, (as is 
sometimes alleged,) antiquated and obsolete; or 
whether it furnishes the rule of action to the slave- 
holder, the rule of condition to the slave ? 

From statutory enactments and recognized codes, 
we now turn to the courts. Their reported deci- 
sions, in the hands of the lawyers, and in daily use 
in the decision of new causes, will tell us whether or 
no the Code of Slavery is obsolete, and the statute 
book of the slave states a dead letter. 

Chief Justice Kinsey, of the Supreme Court of 
New -Jersey, in 1797, said: 

"They" (Indians) "have so long been recognized 
as slaves in our law, that it would be as great a vio- 
lation of the rights of property to establish a contrary 
doctrine ut the present day, as it would in the case 
of Africans, and as useless to investigate the manner 
in which they originally lost their freedom." (The 
State vs. Wagoner, 1 Halstead's Eeports, 374 to 378.) 

To be a slave then, even in Kew-Jersey, is to be 
property, upon the same tenure upon which otJier 
property is held. This is " the legal relation of mas- 
ter and slave" there, if the courts understand it cor- 
rectly. 



SLAVE OWNERSITTP. 29 

"We will now travel furtlicr south, and look into 
tlie courts for information. As our guide wc will 
take "Wheeler's Law of Slavery," a regular law- 
book, made for the use of slaveholders.* Slave 
property, like other property, is the subject of fre- 
quent litigation between the different owners or 
claimants of it, or with their neighbors. From these 
suits chiefly, and for use in future suits, the volume 
of Mr. Wheeler is compiled. The incidental testi- 
mony of such a work to the nature and incidents of 
slavery is the strongest and the most unobjectionable 
that can be conceived. We shall refer to it frequent- 
ly in this volume. On the property tenure and 
chattelhood by which slaves are held, its testimo- 
ny is clear and explicit. The idea is involved and 
implied throughout the entire volume. A few di- 
rect statements of the doctrine will be sufficient. 
Let it; be understood that our quotations are the 
decisions of Courts, stated in the language of the 
Judges. 

" Slaves, fromi their nature^ are CHATTELS, and were 
put in the hands of executors, before the act of 1792 



* " A Practical Treatise of the Law of Slavery, being a Compila 
tion of all the Decisions made on that subject, in the several Courts 
of the United States, and State Courts ; with copious notes and 
references to the Statutes and other authorities, sj-stematically 
arranged. By Jacob D. Wheeler, Esq., Counsellor at Law. Kew- 
York : Allan Pollock, Jr. New Orleans : Benjamin Levy. 1837." 
476 pages, octavo. This work is recommended by Hon. Judge H. 
Hichcock, of Alabama, and by the New-York Mercantile Advertiser, 
and New- York Star. 



30 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

declaring them to be i~)ersonal estate.'' (Wlieeler's 
Law of Slavery, p. 2.) 

'' The phrase '^jersonaZ estafc,' in wills and contracts, 
should be understood as embracing slaves." (lb.) 

" Slaves were declared by laAv to be real estate^ and 
descend to the heir at law. They are considered 
real estate in case of descents." (lb.) 

" Although for some purposes slaves are declared 
by statute to be real estate, they are nevertheless, 
intrinsically personal, and are therefore to be con- 
sidered as included in every statute or contract in 
relation to chattels which does not, in terms, exclude 
them. They are liable, as chattels, to the payment 
of debts," &c. (lb. p. 37.) 

In the case of Harris vs. Clarissa and others, 
March Term, 1834, (6 Yerger's Tenn. Rep., 227; 
Wheeler's Law of Slavery, pp. 319-26,) the Chief 
Justice, in delivering the opinion of the Court, found 
occasion (p. 325) to say : 

" In Maryland, the issue^'' {{. e., of female slaves) 
" is considered not an accessory, but as a part of the 
?«e, like that of othej- female animals. (1 Har. & 
McIIen. Eep., 160, 352; 1 Ear. & John's Eep., 526; 
1 Hay w. Eep., 335.) Suppose a brood mare be hired 
for five years, the foals belong to him who has a part 
of the use of the dam. (2 Black. Com., 290; 1 
Ilayw. Eep., 335.) The slave, in Maryland, in this 
respect, is p)laccd on no higher or different groundJ^ 

Mr. Gholson, of the Virginia Legislature, by the 
use of similar language, (as will hei'cafter be quoted,) 
offended the dehcacy of some, who suj^posed him to 



SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 31 

be peculiarly brutish and gross ; but we here find it 
to be in accordance with, the ordinary language of 
the courts of law ! 

About forty-five pages of " Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery" are occupied with judicial decisions con- 
cerning the " warranty of slaves" sold, in respect to 
their soundness, health, " freedom from all redhibi- 
tory vices, diseases," &c. It is impossible to look 
over the revolting details, and to notice the cold- 
hearted insensibility with which the rules and deci- 
sions of the Courts are laid down and recorded, 
without being deeply impressed with the unhuman- 
izing effects of the j^rocess, particularly in the sys- 
tematic forgetfulness that the slave is any thing more 
than a brute animal. The section concerning " tlie 
warranty of irwral qualities''' may be claimed as an 
exception, and is certainly one of the most remarka- 
ble pieces of law literature extant : 

" The 2500th article of the Code of Louisiana 
divides the defects of slaves into two classes : vices 
of hody^ and vices of character^'' " But with regard 
to those of character^ the next article expressly 
declares that they are confined to cases where the 
slave has committed a capital crime, where he is con- 
victed of tJieft^ and where he is in the habit of running 
aivatjy (p. 133.) 

" Drunkenness is a mental, not a physical defect, 
and is not ground of redhibition." (lb.) " But a 
fraudulent concealment of it will be a ground for 
rescinding the contract." (lb., p. 134.) 

" In South Carolina there is no implied warranty 



32 TUE AMERIC^X SLAVE CODE. 

of the moral qualities of the slave ;" "as where a 
slave was sold who had committed burglary, the 
fact being unknown to both the seller and pur- 
chaser." (lb., p. 136.) 

These quotations are made to prove the bona fide, 
matter-of-fact cliattelhood of the slave, or his being 
degraded to the condition of mere 'property^ either 
real or personal. And they show that the condition 
adheres not merely to the hody^ but to the sovX ; to 
the moral qualities that distinguish a man from a 
brute ! It is an honest servant that the vender sells. 
If the article is proved to have been dishonest, the 
sale is vitiated. The honesty of the man, then, is a 
commodity in the market ! 

" Craziness or idiocy is an absolute vice ; and, 
where not apparent, will annul the sale." (lb., p. 139.) 

The God-like intellect of the human chattel is, 
therefore, the commodity sold and warranted ! On 
the same page, a case is cited — " Icar vs. Suars, Jan. 
Term, 1835. 7 Louisiana Eeports, 517" — in which 
Judge Bullard, after stating the law and the facts, 
gave judgment for the plaintilf, sa}dng, " We are 
satisfied that the slave in question was wholly, and 
perhaps worse than useless." 

In the case of the State vs. Mann, the defendant 
was indicted for an assaidt and battery on a hired 
slave, named Lydia. Judgment was rendered for 
the State ; but, on an appeal, the judgment was re- 
versed. In giving his decision. Judge Euifin thus 
disposes of the plea that the relation of master and 
slave resembles other domestic relations : 



SLAVE OWNERSniP. S^ 

" This lias indeed been assimilated, at the bar, 
to the other domestic relations ; and arguments 
drawn from the well-established principles which 
confer and restrain the authority of the parent over 
the child, the tutor over the pupil, the master over 
the apprentice, have been pressed upon us. The 
Court does not recognize their application. There is no 
likeness hetiveen the cases. They are in opposition to 
each other ^ and there is an impassable gulf between them. 
The difference is that which exists between freedom 
and slavery, and a greater cannot be imagined. In 
the one, the end in view is the happiness of the 
youth, born to equal rights with that governor on 
whom the duty devolves of training the youth to 
usefulness, in a station which he is afterwards to 
assume among freemen. To such an end, and ^\^th 
such a subject, moral and intellectual instruction 
seem the natural means ; and, for the most part, 
they are found to suffice. Moderate force is super- 
added, to make the others effectual. If that fail, it 
is better to leave the party to his own headstrong 
passions, and the ultimate correction of the law, than 
to allow it to be immoderately inflicted by a private 
person. With slavery it is far otherwise. The end is 
the profit of the master^ his security, and the public 
safety. The subject is doomed, in his own person 
and his posterity, to hve without knowledge, and 
without capacity to make any thing his own, r.nd to 
toil that others may reap the fruits ^''^ &c. 

From such premises the Judge infers the necessity 
of absolute power in the master over the slave, and 
2* 



34 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

tlic impossibility of any legal protection to tlie slave 
from that jDower, while the slave system continues. 
We shall cite his words, to this effect, in another 
sonnection. 

It would be easy to multij^ly appropriate quota- 
tions from the courts, but we reserve them for a 
still more appropriate use, in treating of the various 
features of slavery, all of which spring out of the 
principle of froperiy in man, and attest its existence 
and activity. 

Let us next see how this matter is understood 
among slaveholders themselves. Hear the testimony 
of their statesmen. 

Thomas Jeffersox, in his letter to Governor 
Coles, of IlHnois, dated August 25th, 1814, asserts 
that slaveholders regard their slaves as property and 
as brutes, in the joaragTaph that follows : 

" Nursed and educated in the daily habit of seeing 
the degraded condition, both bodily and mental, of 
these unfortunate beings, few minds have yet 

DOUBTED THAT THEY WERE AS LEGITIMATE SUB- 
JECTS OF PROPERTY AS THEIR HORSES OR CATTLE." 

(Am. Slaver}' as it is, pp. 110-11.) 

Henry Clay, in his celebrated speech in the 
U. S. Senate, in 1839, based his argument against 
the abolition of slavery on the value of the slaves, 
AS PROPERTY. This was his language : 

" The third impediment to immediate abolition is 
to be found in the immense amount of capital which 
is invested in slave property" " The total value of 
slave property then, by estimate, is twelve hundred 



SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 35 

millions of dollars. And now it is raslily proposed, 
by a single fiat of legislation, to annihilate this im- 
mense amount of j^ropertj ! To annihilate it with- 
out indemnity, and tvithout compemation to the 
OWNERS." " I know that there is a visionary dogma 
which holds that negro slaves cannot be the subject 
of property. I shall not dwell on the speculative 
abstraction. That is property luliich the laiu declares 
TO BE property. Two hundred years of legislation 
have sanctified and sanctioned negro slaves as prop- 
erty." 

This argument identifies slaveholding with human 
chattelhood, and the relinquishment of this claim of 
property with abolition. It bases the practice upon 
the theory, and rests the justification of its perpe- 
tuity upon the practical efiicacy of the law, as being 
neither a dead letter nor obsolete. In this argument 
the slaveholders confide, the nation consents, and 
therefore slavery exists, with all the evils it brings 
in its train. 

By claiming their slaves as "property," the 
"owners" of this property are naturally led to for- 
get and even to deny that they are human beings. 
For proof of this we cite the speech of Mr. Summers 
of Virginia, in the Legislature of that State, January 
26, 1832, as published in the Eichmond Whig: 

" When in the sublime lessons of Christianity, he 
(the slaveholder) is taught to 'do unto others as he 
would have others do unto him,' he never dreams that 
the degraded iiegro is mthin the pale of that holy 
canon." 



36 THE AMERIC.VN SLATE CODE. 

"\Ye Jearn from tliis that the Southern pulpit has 
failed to teach the community a contrary lesson. The 
innocent "legal relation" has been suffered to cir- 
cumscribe the jurisdiction of the golden rule. 

Col. Daytox, formerly member of Congress from 
South-Carolina, in a work entitled, "The South vin- 
dicated from the Treason and Fanaticism of Northern 
Abolitionists," holds the following language : 

"The Northerner looks uj)on a band of negroes as 
so many men^ but the planter or Southerner views 
tliem in very different ligliV 

Mr. Gholson, of Virginia, in his speech in the 
Legislature of that State, Jan. 18, 1831, as published 
in the Richmond Wliig^ (in reply to some members 
who had proposed abolition,) said: 

"Why, I really have been under the impression 
that I ovmed my slaves. I lately purchased four 
tvomen and ten children, in whom I thought I ob- 
tained a great bargain, for I reall}^ supposed they 
were iny property, as were my brood inares." 

Mr. Wise, in the United States House of Eepre- 
sentatives, said: 

"The right of petition belongs to the people of 
the United Staves. Slaves are not people in the eye 
of the law. They have no legal p)ersonality.''^ 

Another gentleman (as quoted by Mr. Vanderpool, 
of New- York) said: "Slaves had no more right to 
be heard than horses and dogs," 

Mr, Vanderpool, of New- York, himself said: 
"He should be ashamed of himself, if he ever could 
have supposed that slaves had a right to petition 



SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 37 

this or any other body where slavery exists." — "Had 
any one, before to-day, ever dreamed that the appel- 
lation of the people embraced slaves? Sir! (said 
he,) I hesitate not to say, that Avere I a Southern man, 
I would not submit to the doctrine that slaves have 
a right to petition, if Congress were ever mad enough 
to sanction it. Nay, I go farther, and say, that as a 
Northern man I would not submit to it." 
Mr. Pickens, of South Carolina, said : 
"The offense of Mr. Adams consisted in his 
announcing, that he had a petition from the slaves, 
THUS DESTROYING THE RELATION BETWEEN MASTER 

AND SLAVE, and denying the doctrine that the slave 

can BE HEARD ONLY THROUGH HIS MASTER." 

The doctrine, thus explained and advocated, was 
deliberately and solemnly sanctioned by the House 
of Eepresentatives of the United States, in a resolu- 
tion adopted Feb. 11, 1837— yeas 162, nays 18, as 
follows : 

^'Resolved, that slaves do not possess the right of 
petition secured to the people of the United States, 
by the Constitution." 

Thus was the national sanction given to the defi 
nition of "the legal relation between master and 
slave," which denies that "the relation" can consist 
with the recognition of personality and humanity in 
the slave. 

Ecclesiastical bodies have been equally explicit in 
their definition of the relation. 

The Charleston Baptist Association addressed a 
memorial to the Legislature of South Carohna, main- 



38 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

taining that " the Divine Author of our lioly rehgion" 
adopted this iustitutiou ''as one of the allowed rela- 
tions of society," and they further say : 

" Neither society nor individuals have any more 
authority to demand a relinquishment, without an 
equivalent, in the one case than in the other," (that 
is, their right to) " the money and lands inherited from 
ancestors, or derived from industry." " We would 
resist to the utmost every invasion of this nght, come 
from what quarter and under what pretence it may." 

In the settlement of the estate of Eev. Dr. Furman, 
of the same sect, in the same State, his legal repre 
sentatives exercised this "right," in an advertise- 
ment of a pubhc sale of his property at auction, as 
follows : 

"A plantation or tract of land on and in Wateree 
swamp, a tract of the first quahty of fine land on the 
waters of Black Kiver ; a lot of land in the town of 
Camden; a library of a miscellaneous character, 
chiefly theological ; twenty-seven negroes, some of 
them very prime ; two mules ; one horse ; and an old 
wagon." 

" Slaves are neither considered nor treated as human 
beings."* This is the testimony of Mr. L. Turner, 
a regular and respectable member of the Second 



* Nothing else than the prevalence of this feeling can a«?ount 
for the preposterous effort to discredit the unity of the negro race 
with the rest of mankind I It is very remai-kable that Mi\ Jefferson, 
■who wrote so eloquently against slavery, and whose kiudness«to 
his own mulatto slave children was so commcndahle, should have 
published to the world such crude speculations of this character — 



SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 89 

Presbyterian cTiurcli in Springfield, Illinois ; wlio was 
brought up in Caroline County, Virginia. And tlie 
testimony is approvingly communicated by Eev. 
William T. Allan, of Chatham, Illinois, pastor of a 
Presbyterian church in that place. Mr. Allan is son 
of Eev. Dr. Allan, pastor of the Presbyterian church 
in Huntsville, Alabama. (Weld's " Slavery as it is," 
p. 46.) 

" Slaveholders regard their slaves as lyoperty, the 
mere instruments of their convenience and pleasure. 
One who is a slaveholder at heart, never recognizes a 
human heing in a slave.'''' This is the testimony of 
Angelina Grimke Weld, daughter of the late Judge 
Grimke of the Supreme Court of South Carolina, 
and sister of the late Hon. Thomas S. Grimke of 
Charleston. (lb., 57.) 

When a slave is accidentally killed, the Southern 
newspapers speak of it merely as a hss of property to 
the owner. Nothing is said of the bereaved widow, 
children, or parents of the deceased. It would be 
easy to present numerous instances in proof. 

The Natchez (Miss.) Free Trader of February 12, 
1838, contained the followdng advertisement : 

" Found. — A negro's head was picked up on the 
railroad, yesterday, which the owner can have by 
calling at this office and paying for this advertise- 
ment.'' (lb., 169.) 



not less unpliilosophical than imscriptural. It is still more remark- 
aUe that professed believers ia the Bible should express doubts on 
the subject! 



40 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

The idea of the advertiser probably Avas, that the 
head would be of use to the owuer in establishing his 
claim on the llailroad Company, or some one, for 
damages in the destruction of his property. 

The Vicksburg (Miss.) Regi^tei\ December 27, 1838, 
contains the following item of news for the amuse- 
ment of its readers : 

"Ardor in Betting. — Two gentlemen at a tavern 
having summoned the waiter, the poor fellow had 
scarcely entered when he fell down in a fit of apo- 
plexy. 'He's dead!' exclaimed one. 'He'll come 
to,' replied the other. 'Dead for five hundred!' 
' Done !' retorted the second. The noise of the fall, 
and the confusion which followed, brought up the 
landlord, who called out to fetch a doctor. ' No, no ! 
we must have no interference — there's a bet depend- 
ing!' 'But, sir, I shall lose a valuable servant!' 
'Never mind, you can put him down in the bill!' " 

This is shocking : but, aside from the moral wrong 
of betting, the ^jrwic?)jZe involved differs nothing from 
that avowed by the Charleston Baptist Association 
already quoted, so far as the matter of human chattel- 
hood is concerned. Admit the doctrine, as held by 
the Association, and as defended by Mr. Clay, and 
the life of the negro was no more sacred than the Life 
of a horse. "The innocent legal relation" "sanc- 
tifies and sanctions" the whole. 

Tlie same principle finds daily expression in the 
ordinary vocabulary of slaveholders. Their slaves, 
like their other domestic animals, are called "stock." 
The children of slaves are spoken of, prospectively, 



SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 41 

even before they are born, as anticipated " increase." 
Female slaves that are mothers are called " breeders," 
till past child-bearing. Those who compel the labor 
of slaves are called " drivers." Like horses they are 
warranted, when sold, to be "sound," and arc re- 
turned by the purchaser when "unsound." 

The same principle is recognized by the free citi- 
zens and professed Christians of the North, whenever 
they speak of the slaveholder's " rights of property," 
or entertain the idea of "compensation" to them, in 
case of a general abolition of slavery, or of the re- 
demption of particular slaves, in any such sense as 
implies that such appropriation or purchase money 
would be equitably due. 

It remains to be observed that this claim of prop- 
erty in slaves, both in theory and practice, as defined 
by legislation and jurisprudence, as defended by 
theologians and as sanctioned by ecclesiastical bodies, 
as carried out into every-day practice by the pious 
and by the profane, is manifestly and notoriously a 
claim, not only to the bodies and the physical energies 
of the slave, but also to his immortal soul, his human 
intelligence, his moral powers, and even (in the case 
of a pious slave) to his Christian graces and virtues. 
This is proved by the fact, that the body of the 
slave without his soul would be a dead carcass of no 
value. Or, if it be objected that the same distinction 
obtains between a dead horse and a living one, our 
proposition is proved by the fact, that if the slave 
had only the intellectual powers of a horse, his in- 
feriority to a horse in physical strength would sink 



42 THE AMERICiK SLAVE CODE. 

Hm below the pecuniary value of a horse, instead 
of his commanding, as he now does, the price of a 
number of horses. 

In advertisements of slaves to be sold or to be 
hired out, their intelligence, their skill, their honesty, 
their sobriety, their benevolent dispositions are spe- 
cified and insisted on, as items of primary importance 
in estimating their value. Their inety is not unfre- 
quently mentioned in the inventory, and they are 
recommended as being worthy members of Metho- 
dist, Baptist, or Presbyterian churches. And chiu'ch 
members of the same sects both buy and sell them 
on the basis of these recommendations. 

This, in the United States of America, in this nine- 
teenth century, is " the legal relation of master and 
slave" — a relation that challenges as "goods" and 
" chattels personal, to all intents, constructions, and 
purposes whatsoever," the immortal soal of man, the 
image of the invisible Creator, the temple of the Holy 
Spirit, the j^urchase of a Eedecmer's blood. The 
statement is no rhetorical flourish. It is no mere 
logical inference. It is no metaphysical subtlety. It 
is no empty abstraction. It is no obsolete or inoper- 
ative fiction of the law. It is veritable matter-of-fact 
reality, acted out every day wherever and whenever 
a negro or any one else is claimed as an American 
slave. K any slaveholder denies it, let him be chal- 
lenged to put the denial in writing, duly attested, and 
in such a shape that the courts of law can take cog- 
nizance of it. Whenever he does this, and puts the 
paper ui the hands of his slave or trusty friend, his 



SLAVE OWNERSHIP. 



slave is set free. Every intelligent slaveholder knows 
this. 

The evidence already presented is sufficient, biit 
there is much more in reserve. In the chapters that 
follow, the various features of the slave system will 
be presented, as defined by the Slave Code and as 
exhibited in daily practice. And each one of these 
featui-es will be seen to grow out of the foundation 
principle of American Slavery — to wit, human chat- 
telhood, as exhibited in this chapter, thus proving 
the presence and the vitality of that principle by its 
practical operations and bearings. The whole system 
may be educed from this parent stock, as any science, 
in detail, is educed from its fundamental axioms. Let 
any reflecting person assume that human chattelhood, 
or property in man, is the foundation of the system ; 
then let him follow out, in his own mind, the natural 
and necessary workings of such a principle reduced 
to practice, and he will be able to anticipate before- 
hand almost the entire code of slavery, and the prac- 
tices existing under it. 



CHAPTER n. 

SLAVE TKAFFIC. 

Sale— Purchase— Barter— Mortgage— Auction— Coffle-gang— Shipments— As ab- 
solutely as in the case of any other Property, and by the same Tenure. 

This feature must result, of necessity, from '-the 
legal relation" of ownership exhibited in the first 
chapter. The quotations there made cover explicitly 
this ground. 

*' The master may sell him." " Slaves shall be 
sold." " Sold, transferred, or pawned as goods, or 
personal estate, for goods they were, and as such they 
were esteemed." 

Any modification of this feature must evidently 
relax the application of the principle of ownership, 
and limit its operation. In the Spanish, Portuguese, 
and French colonies, such modifications, neverthe- 
less, obtained. The Code Noir, art. 47, prohibits the 
selling of the husband without the wife, the parents 
without the children, or vice versa. In cases of vol- 
untary sales, made contrary to this regulation, the 
wife or husband, the children or parents, though ex- 
pressly retained by the seller, pass, by the same con- 
veyance, to the purchaser, and may be claimed by 



SLAVE TRAFFIC. 45 

him without any additional price. (See Stephen's 
Slaverer, 69 ;* Stroud's Sketch, 51.) 

What bearing this humane reguhition would have 
upon our internal slave-trade, if it were established 
in this country, the reader will see by the following 
account of its operation. 

Says the compiler of the Annals of the Sovereign 
Council of Martinique : 

" This law has always been rigidly executed, when- 
ever a claim has been set up on the part of the pur- 
tJiaser. I have known slaves who have been sent to 
Guadaloupe or St. Domingo to be expatriated and 
sold, to reclaim their children remaining in our colony, 
with success, through the action of the purchasers in 
the colonies to which they were sent." (See Stephen's 
Slavery, 69 and 70, citing Annals de la Martinique, 
tome i., p. 285. Vide Stroud, p. 51.) 

It would not, probably, be quite as easy for slave 
children to recover their aged parents^ or for husbands 
to reclaim their feeble and si/:ildy wives^ by this "action 
of the purchasers." Humanity, nevertheless, would 
gain much. The principle of human chattel hood 
would be weakened. Perhaps it was partly through 
the influence of this and similar relaxations of the 
principle that the entire system was swept away in 
Mexico and the South American Eepublics. By this 
feature of the Code Noir, the bondage under its ju- 

* This remarkable provision arises, doubtless, from the fact that 
the laws respecting slavery in those colonies are framed in the 
mother country, and not (as in the British colonies) by colonial 
legislatures, composed of slaveholdei's. 



46 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

risdiction was made to resemble, in this aspect, the 
feudalism or serfdom of northern Europe, where the 
villein is attached to the soil, rather than the chattel 
slavery of the American slave States, 

In Pemisylvania, in New- York, perhaps in other 
American States, when measures were taken for the 
prospective abolition of slavery, the sale of slaves 
to be sent out of the State was prohibited by express 
statute. Except in these instances, we know of no 
departure, in the matter of sale and transfer, in our 
American slave States, from the principle of unre- 
stricted and absolute human chattelhood, unless the 
anomaly be found in the State of Louisiana, as hinted 
in our first chapter, where it was stated that slaves 
are held in Louisiana as real estate. " In the slave- 
holding States," (says Judge Stroud,) " except in Louis- 
iana, no law exists to prevent the violent separation 
of parents from then- children, or even from each 
other." (Stroud's Sketch, p, 50.) Again, after 
dwelling upon these cruelties of the domestic slave- 
trade, as being pecuHar to "the republican States of 
North America," the same writer adds in a note, 
(p. 52,) " From the generahty of this remark, the 
State of Louisiana must be excepted." " The slaves 
are declared to be real estate, to be ranked among 
immovable property, Wlien, therefore, the owner of 
slaves is, as I presume is most commonly the case, 
possessed of land, the slave cannot be separated from 
it by process of law. Besides this humane regula- 
tion, there are several others which deserve to be 
signalized, viz. : ' If, at a pubHc sale of slaves, there 



SLAVE TIL'VFFIC. 47 

happen to be some who are disabled through old age 
or otherwise, and who have children, such slaves 
shall not be sold but with his or her children, whom 
he or she may think proper to go with.' " (1 Mar- 
tin's Digest/612; Act of July 7, 180G ; Stroud's 
Sketch, p. 52-3.) 

How far these provisions are, at this late day, 
available for the benefit of the slaves of Louisiana, 
we have no means of knowing. Louisiana has been 
a purchasing, rather than a slave- exporting State. 
The striking contrast between these enactments and 
the known usages and scenes of other States, mark 
their anomalous character, as exceptions which prove 
and illustrate the general rule of unrestricted chattel- 
hood in our slaveholding States. 

It is to be noticed that these refreshing anomalies 
are witnessed in only one of the slave States : a State 
coming within our jurisdiction from under that of 
France, and receiving its earher features of polity 
under the laws of Spain. Louisianian slavery took 
its type from the Code Notr, and from the usages 
growing up under what our citizens are pleased to 
denominate Spanish despotism and superstition. 
Anglo-Saxon civilization and rehgion, with all their 
"republican" and "Protestant" boastings, have not 
yet readied the same point of progress ; nor do we 
learn that in Florida, acquired from Spain, the mild 
features of Spanish slavery have survived the trans- 
fer. The reason may be", that too many Northern 
citizens (the most merciless of all slaveholders) have 
planted themselves there. Be this as it may, it is 



48 THE AMERICAJSr SLAVE CODE. 

certain that the " legal relation of master and slave," 
as commonly" understood, practised, vindicated, and 
protected, in these United States, differs widely, in 
the feature now under consideration, from that de- 
fined by the Code Noir. We may venture to affirm 
that the commonly received exposition, as it exists 
in theory and practice, in the Church and the State, 
has been truthfully set forth by one of our most prom- 
inent and popular statesmen, the late Ilenry Clay, 
in his sj^eech in the U. S. Senate, Feb. 7, 1839, in 
which he said : 

" The moment that the incontestable /ac< is admit- 
ted, that the slaves are property^ the law of movable 
property irresistibly attaches itself to them, and 
secures the right of carrying them from one State to 
another."* 



* It may be said that there is an exception to this statement of 
Mr. Clay, in the laws of some of the shive States, prohibiting the 
importation of slaves from other States ; also, in the restrictions 
recently imposed, on motion of Mr. Clay himself, upon the jirose- 
cution of the slave-trade from the Federal District. 

Those State regulations were, for reasons of polic}- or supposed 
interest, to encourage slave-breeding at home, instead of receiving 
supplies from abroad. Whether consistent or inconsistent with 
the rights of property, they have their precedent in the prohibi- 
tions of importations of other kinds of property, by different na- 
tions and States. But, under our Federal Constitution, the power 
of regidating commerce between the several States is committed to 
Congress, not to the States; and hence, in Mississippi, notwith- 
standing the prohibitory enactment, the slave-dealers in 1836-7 
brought into that State and sold slaves to the value of ninety mil- 
lions of dollars ! It is true that when they undertook the collection 
of their debts, the purchasers pleaded the illegality of the sales ; the 



SLAVE TRAFFIC. 49 

This definition, wliick is acted upon every day, 
identifies " the legal relation" and the slave system 
with the domestic slave-trade, and its constant and 
violent disruption of the most sacred and tender ties 
of consanguinity and affection. If the "legal rela- 
tion" does not produce this effect in respect to each 
slave, it does^ in each instance, uphold and sanction 
the principle of chattelhood upon which alone the 
traffic in slaves rests. It recognizes the rightfulness 
of the traffic by recognizing the rightfulness of slave 
ownership, which includes the right of purchase and 
sale. This is what Mr. Clay affirmed, and, thus far, 
he spoke truthfully. The moment the right of prop- 
erty in man is admitted, (and here lies the core of 
the " relation,") that moment the right of purchase 
and sale is virtually conceded likewise. It was a 
triumph of human sympathy over legal congruity 
and logical consistency, that enacted the Code Noir. 

The exposition of Mr. Clay reduces slaves to a 
level with poultry and swine ; it denies to them per- 
sonality and the attributes of human beings. It 
does this not merely in theory, but on a point of the 
most pressing practical importance. It certifies us 
that the chattel principle is neither a dead letter nor 
an unmeaning abstraction. It exhibits the practical 
statesmanship, not of Henry Clay only, but of all 

State courts sustained them, and thus they obtained the greater 
part of the importation -without payment 1 

The restriction in the Federal District prevents ckalers from bring- 
ing in supplies from the States, for sale and shipment abroad, but 
does not prevent purchases and sales among the citizens. 
3 



50 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

who admit the validity of the so-called "legal rela- 
tion." 

A similar exposition we have from Eev. James 
Smylie, of the Amite Presbytery, ^lississippi, in a 
pamphlet written in defense of slaveholding. Allud- 
ing to the charges of abolitionists, he admits the facts 
adduced by them, but denies their criminality. And 
he says : 

"If slavery be a sin, and advertising and appre- 
hending slaves with a view to restore them to their 
masters, is a direct violation of the divine law, and if 
the BUYING, SELLING, and holding a slave, for 
THE SAKE OF GAix, is a licinous sin and scandal, 
then verily, three fourths of all the Episcopalians, 
Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyterians, in eleven 
States of this Union, are of the devil. They hold, 
if they do not buy and sell slaves, and (with few 
exceptions) they hesitate not to apprehend and re- 
store runaway slaves, when in their power." 

It will be noticed that the holding, the huying, and 
the selling of a slave are here put together, as being 
essentially of the same character. And common 
sense as well as "the /a?y" of the peculiar "relation," 
as expounded by Henr}^ Clay, attests the same thing. 

A large portion of "Wheeler's LaAV of Slavery" is 
occupied Avith legal decisions connected, directly or 
indirectly, with cases growing out of the transfer of 
slaves. One division, or chapter of the work, treats 
" Of the Increase of Slaves — to whom the increase be- 
longs — of the grant or devise of the increase." Another 
topic is, "Of the Title to Slaves;" another, "Of War- 



SLAVE TRAFFIC. 51 

rantj;" finotlier, "Of Hiring of Slaves;" another, 
"Of Mortgage of Slaves;" another, "Of Dower of 
Slaves;" another, "Of the Division of Slaves;" 
another, " Of the Eemainder in Slaves." Upwards 
of one hundred and fifty pages of the book (nearly 
one third of the entire work) are occujoicd with these 
topics. From the extent and variety of litigation 
coming before the courts and demanding these com- 
plicated legal rules and decisions, it would seem that 
a very large part of the business transactions of the 
people must consist in the reception or transfer, in 
some form, of this species of property. And, at 
every step, it appears that transfers of slave property 
are made upon the same principles that govern the 
transfer of other property, that it is held and con- 
veyed under the same teniu'e, and with as little sense 
of the impropriety of the transaction ; thus placing, 
in 'practice, a human being upon a level with a raere 
thing. Thus, when the judge, the lawyer, or the law 
compiler or author would lay down the legal rule by 
which the decision should be made in a litigated case, 
in a matter of sale, dehvery, possession, warranty, &c., 
he looks up the precedents and rules originally occur- 
ring or laid down in respect to ^'■amare^^ or "a colt," 
and then, with the utmost coolness and gravity, ap- 
plies it, as vahd law, to the sale, delivery, or warranty 
of "a girir An instance of this occurs in "Whee- 
ler's Law of Slavery," pp. 119, 120, in a note on the 
case of Smith vs. Kowzee, Spring Term 1821 ; a case 
in which "the girl" purchased was unable to travel 
home with her new master, eight miles distant, and 



62 THE AMERICAN SLAVE COPE. 

soon died. A lawsuit followed, and the law con- 
cerning other live stock determined the case I 

In one instance (p. 68) we find "a negro woman 
slave named Peg," sold for $300, with leave to return 
her in three weeks, if the purchaser did not like her. 
With her new master she became frost-bitten, which 
rendered her ^^ of little value.^'' Hence a suit between 
the parties, judgment given, an apj)eal taken, judg- 
ment reversed — just as in the case of a horse or an ox. 

On page 79 we learn that "five 3^ears' peaceable 
possession gives a title to a slave, and which, if lost, 
may be regained." We infer that if possession, as 
between contending claimants of slave property, be 
thus potent, it would be at least equally powerful, as 
between the possessor and the slave's legal right to 
freedom. 

Of the extent of the slave traffic between the slave- 
growing and planting States (of which we shall 
speak presently) some tolerably rehable approxima- 
tion towards the true statistics may be gathered. But 
of the extent of local and neighborhood transfers, 
with which Wheeler's reported cases seem mostly 
occupied, very little can be accurately known. AVe 
can only say that a perusal of "Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery" has very greatly swelled our own estimate 
or apprehension of that extent. It can hardly be 
supposed that more than a tithe of such transfers 
wovdd occasion lawsuits. But we seem to see the 
courts crowded with them, and a compilation of the 
reported cases swelling a law volume. It must be 
folly to pretend that the slave traffic occupies only 



slavf: traffic. 53 

the vulgar portion of Southern society, when it 
figures so hirgely in the courts. 

" Slaves may be sold and transferred from one to 
another, tvithout any statutory restriction or limitation, 
as to the separation of parents and children, d'c, except 
in Louisiana." (Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 41.) 

It can hardly be necessary to cite witnesses to 
prove that this feature of the Slave Code, which 
licenses the slave-trade and the separation of families, 
is not a dead letter. But it might be useful to im- 
press upon the reader some idea of the magnitude 
and the atrocity of this traffic. This would ojDen a 
wide field. We might refer the inquirer to Weld's 
"Slavery as it is," to Jay's "Inquiry," and to Good- 
eU's "History of Slavery and Anti-Slavery," for 
collections of facts and testimonies on this subject, 
upon which we cannot enlarge here. 

The extent of the slave-trade in America may be 
conceived, from the testimony of the Presbyterian 
Synod of Kentucky, that "these scenes" (i. e. coflSe- 
gangs) are ^^ daily occurring in the midst of us;" that 
"there is not a neighborhood where these heart-rend- 
ing scenes are not displayed;" that "there is not a 
village or road that does not behold the sad procession 
of manacled outcasts, whose chains and mournful 
countenances tell that they are exiled by force from 
all that their hearts hold dear," 

Its general prosecution may be seen by the numer- 
ous advertisements of both purchasers and venders, 
in the most respectable newspapers in the slave 
States, as, for example, the following: 



54 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

"Negroes for Sale. — A negro woman, 24 years 
of age, and her two cliildren, one eight and the other 
three years old. Said negroes will be sold sepa- 
rately or together, as desired. The woman is a good 
seamstress. She will be sold low for cash, or ex- 
CHAXGED FOR GROCERIES. For terms, apply to 
"Matthew Bliss & Co., 1 Front Levee." 

\^Kew-0rlea7is Bee. 

"I will give the highest cash j)rice for likely Ne- 
groes, from 10 to 25 years of age. 

"George Kephart." 

[Alexandria {D. C.) Gazette. 

"Fifty Negroes tt anted immediately.' — The 
subscriber will give a good market price for fifty 
likely negroes, from 10 to 30 years of age. 

"Henry Davis." 

[^Petersburg ( Va.) Constellation. 

Having obtained their supplies and driven or 
shipped them South, the dealers offer them for sale, 
in advertisements like the following, which appeared 
in the papers of Charleston, S. C. : 

"One Hundred and Twenty Negroes for 
Sale.— The subscriber \iQs,just arrivedfrom Petersburg^ 
Virginia.! with one hundred and twenty lihely young ne- 
groes of both sexes and every description, which he 
offers for sale on the most reasonable terms. The lot 
now on hand consists of plough-boys, several likely 
and well-qualified house servants of both sexes, 
several women unth children, small girls suitable for 
nurses, and several small boys without their 



SLAVE TRAFFIC. 55 

MOTHERS. Planters and traders are earnestly re- 
quested to give tlie subscriber a call previously to 
making purchases elsewhere, as lie is enabled to sell 
as clieap or cheaper than can be sold by any other 
Ijerson in the trade. BENJAMIN Davis. 

''Hamburg, S. C, Septemler 28, 1838." 

The respectability and profitableness of the traffic 
may be inferred from the fact, that some of the largest 
shipping merchants are slave merchants, that they 
own, and charter, and freight numerous vessels to 
transport their slaves coastwise, and invest princely 
fortunes as capital in the business. 

The importance of this branch of commerce will 
be apparent from the speeches of leading statesmen, 
and the paragraphs of prominent editors. 

Henry Clay, in his speech before the Coloniza- 
tion Society, in 1829, said: 

"It is believed that no ichere, in the farming por- 
tion of the United States, would slave labor be gen- 
erally employed, if the proprietor were not tempted 
to raise slaves, by the high price of the Southern 
MARKET which keeps it up in his own." 

Mr. Gholson, of Virginia, in the same speech in 
the State Legislature before quoted, after claiming 
his negro women as his property, like his "brood 
mares," expatiated upon the profitableness and the 
rightfulness of the investment. " The owner of land 
had a reasonable right to its annual products, the 
owner of brood mares to their product, and the owner 
of female slaves to their increase." "The value of 



56 THE AMERICAN SLAVS CODE. 

the propert}' justifies the expense; and I do not 
hesitate to say that in it consists much of our wealth.^'' 

The Editor of the Virginia Times, in 1836, made 
a calculation that 120,000 slaves went out of that 
State during the year, that 80,000 of them went with 
their owners who removed, leaving 40,000 who were 
SOLD, at an average price of $600; amounting to 
twenty-four millions of dollars. 

Similar estimates and testimonies might be added. 

The annexation of Texas and the conquest of 
Mexico were openly advocated, and notoriously pro- 
secuted, for the object of extending the area of 
slavery, and thereby opening a new slave marke. 
for the breeders of slaves. And the coastwise slave 
trade has been j)rotected by the National Govern 
ment, and its diplomacy prostituted to this purpose 
The particulars may be found in Jay's "View of the 
Action of the Federal Government in behalf of 
Slavery," and Jay's "Eeview of the Mexican War;" 
also (briefly) in Goodell's "History of Slavery and 
Anti-Slavery." 

Of the character of this traffic Httle more need be 
said. By om* own National Government the African 
slave-trade is branded "piracy." But Thomas Jef- 
ferson Randolph, in the Virginia Legislature, in 
1832, declai'cd the domestic slave-trade to be '■'■much 
worse.^' 

About 1100 citizens of the Federal District, in- 
cluding Judge Cranch and the principal clergy of 
the District, petitioned Congress against it, (as there 
existing ;) and, comparing it with the African slave- 



SLAVE TRAFFIC, 57 

trade, they said that it is " scarcely less disgraceful 
in its character, and even more demoralizing in its 
influence." This was in 1828. The Grand Jury of 
the District had, many j^ears before, (1802,) presented 
it as a nuisance.* Its character there, at that time, 
differs nothing from its character in the ditferent 
States, at present. 

The New-Orleans Courier^ February 15th, 1839, 
says: "The United States law" (prohibiting the 
African slave-trade) "may, and probably does put 
MILLIONS into the pockets of the people living be- 
tween the Eoanoke and Mason and Dixon's hne; 
still we think it would require some casuistry to 
show that the present slave-trade from that quarter is 
a whit better than the one from Africa^ 

It may be asked, icho are they, at the South, that 
prosecute this domestic slave-trade? The Presby- 
terian Synod of Kentucky, describing its extent, its 
common occurrence and its barbarities, inform ns, in 
the same paragraph, that "professors of the rehgion 
of mercy," "who hold to our communion," have 
"torn the mother from the children, and sent them 
into returnless exile. Yet acts of discipline have 
rarely" [neverf] "followed such conduct." In the 
Presbyterian General Assembly of 1835, it was stated 



* By the Act of Congress of 1S50, the slave dealers are prohibited 
from making the Federal District a deposit for slaves. But this 
does not prevent any citizen of the District from selling his slave, 
or purchasing a slave from abroad. 

f James G. Birney, long resident in Kentucky, and a Bresby- 

terian, says "never." 

J 3* 



58 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

by an elder, Mr. Stewart, of Illinois, and without 
contradiction, that "even ministers of the gospel 
and Doctors of Divinity may engage in this unholy 
trallic, and yet sustain their high and holy calling." 
"Elders," said he, "ministers and Doctors of Divi- 
nity, are, with both hands, engaged in the practice." 
Yet nothing was done or said by the Assembly in 
condemnation of it. The testimony of Eev. James 
Smylie, already cited for another purpose, implicates 
"three fourths" of four leading religious sects in the 
practice. 

If a distinction be set up between the Virginian 
breeders and Mississippi purchasers, gentlemen plant- 
ers, on the one hand, and the human drovers, com- 
monly called "soul-drivers," on the other, Avho ply 
between the two, disposing at the far South of their 
"stock" purchased at the North, we maintain that 
there is no legal or moral distinction between them. 
" The legal relation" is as innocent and as criminal 
in the one as in the other. The "growers," the " con- 
sumers" and "dealers" so necessary to them, stand 
on the same level. 

Besides, the "dealers" are sometimes esteemed as 
respectable and as pious as the " growers" and " con- 
simiers." A number of authentic narratives assure 
us that itinerant preachers, in more sects than one, 
carry on the double avocation of convet^ting souls, and 
haying up the souls and bodies of men, women and 
children, for sale. An instance, in " the fine old Me- 
thodist preacher who dealt in slaves," maybe found 
in Weld's " Slavery as it is," p. 180. In the higher 



SLAVE TRAFFIC. 59 

circles of society at tlie South, tliis would be tliouglit 
low and vulgar — equally so with buying up horses 
and swine. But slave-trading on a sufficiently large 
scale is considered a reputable employment, just as 
the large importers and distillers of rum are respect- 
ed among us, while the dealer of drams is despised. 
The items that follow are from the work of Mr. Weld, 
just mentioned, and which, for thirteen years past, 
has had an extensive circulation and eager perusal 
in our widely extended country, without having had 
one of its vast collection of facts disproved or even 
questioned, to our knowledge. 

" That they" (the smaller dealers) " are not de- 
spised because it is their business to trade in human 
beings and bring them to market, is plain from the 
fact that when some ' gentleman of property and 
standing,' and of a ' good family,' embarks in a negro 
speculation, and employs a dozen ' soul-drivers ' to 
traverse the upper country and drive to the South 
coflfles of slaves, expending hundreds of thousands in 
his wholesale purchases, he does not lose caste. 

" It is known in Alabama that Mr. Erwin", son-in- 
law of Henry Clay, and brother of J. P. Erwin, 
formerly postmaster and late Mayor of the city of 
Nashville, laid the foundation of a princely fortune 
in the slave-trade carried on from the Northern slave 
States to the planting South ; that Hon. H. Hitch- 
cock, brother-in-law of Mr. E., and since one of the 
Judges of the Supreme Court of Alabama, was in- 
terested with him in the traffic ; and that a late mem- 
ber of the Kentucky Senate, (Col. Wall,) not only 



60 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

carried on tlic same business a few years ago, but 
accompanied his droves in person down the Missis- 
sijipi. Not as the driver^ for that would be vulgar 
drudgery, beneath a gentleman, but as a nabob in 
state, ordering his understrappers. 

" It is also Avell known that President Jackson 
was a ' soul-driver,' and that even so late as the year 
before the last war, he bought up a coffle of slaves 
and drove them down to Louisiana for sale. 

"Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq., the principal slave 
auctioneer in Charleston, S. C, is of one of the first 
families, and moves in the very highest class of so- 
ciety there. He is a descendant of the distinguished 
General Gadsden, of revolutionary memory," and 
" member of the Continental Congress," " after- 
wards Governor of the State." " The Rev. Dr. Gads- 
den, rector of St. Philip's Church, Charleston, and 
Eev. Philip Gadsden," and " Col. James Gadsden, of 
the U. States' Army, are his brothers." " Under his 
hammer, men, women and children go off by thou- 
sands ; its stroke probably sunders, daihj^ husbands 
and wives, parents and children, brothers and sisters, 
peril aps to see each other's faces no more. Now, 
who supply the auction table of this Thomas Gads- 
den, Esq., with its loads of human merchandise? 
These same ' detested soul-di-ivers,' forsooth, (as they 
arc sometimes called, even at the South.) They prowl 
tlirough the countrj^, buy, catch, and fetter them, and 
drive their chained coffles to his stand, where Thomas 
Gadsden, Esq., knocks them off to the highest bidder, 
to Ex-Gov. Butler, perhaps, or to Ex-Go v. Hayne, 



SLAVE TRAFFIC. 61 

or to Hon. Eobert Barnwell Khctt," (M. C.,) " or (it 
may be) to his own Eeverend brother, Dr. Gadsden." 
(Weld's " Slavery as it is," p. 174.) 

One illustration more must suffice. During the 
great negTO speculation of 1836, when all the negro- 
consuming States were insanely eager to purchase 
at high prices, and all the negro -breeding States 
were enriching themselves with the sales, the ' soul- 
drivers,' now multiplied beyond all former precedent, 
were separating wives and husbands, parents and 
children, with unwonted celerity, and driving them 
in chained coffles, or droves, as speedily as possible 
to the market. The whole South was feverish and 
in motion. Money for the operation was in brisk 
demand. The banks extended their loans, and were 
drained. Capitalists demanded high rates of interest. 
Through the banks they made loans to the specu- 
lators. Then it was that the Trustees of the Gen- 
eral Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, lured by 
these high rates of interest, though well knowing, 
as every body did, the purposes for which their cap- 
ital was wanted, withdrcAV their funds, to the amount 
of $9-4,692.88, from a Northern institution where 
they were drawing the usual interest, and invested 
them in the Southwestern banks, where they would 
be loaned to the speculators in the bodies and souls 
of men, women, and children. In the re-action and 
general bankruptcy that followed, the Presbyterian 
Church lost $68,893.88 of their funds. Had the 
General Assembly and its Trustees understood and 
felt, as they should have done, the sinfulness of " the 



62 THE AilERiaVN SLAVE CODE. 

legal relation of master and slave," tliej would liave 
understood and felt tlie sinfulness of this abominable 
slave-trade which the relation involves, and the 
consequent sinfulness of loaning money to carry it 
on. But they deemed it "ultra" and "fanatical" to 
recognize these self-evident truths. And therefore 
they lost the greater part of their funds. 

We dismiss this feature of the Slave Code, presum- 
ing that its paternity, its character, its vitahty, and 
its jDractical workings have now been made sufli- 
ciently clear. In this feature of the system, its Slave 
Traffic, the people have been found no better than 
their laws, and the Church no better than the people. 



CHAPTEE ni. 

SEIZURE OF SLAVE PROPERTY FOR DEBT. 

As Property, Slaves may be seized and sold to pay the Debts of their Owners, 
while living, or for the settlement of their Estates, after their decease. 

This is evident from tlie very nature of property, 
especially of chattels personal, as well as from the 
fact that slaves may be bought and sold, and pawned 
or mortgaged for the security of debts. A pawn or 
mortgage is of the nature of barter. If not redeemed, 
it becomes a barter in the end. And barter is only 
one form of purchase and sale. Whatever may be 
bought and sold may be bartered, consequently 
mortgaged; and, if unredeemed, seized, taken pos- 
session of. 

The very definition of slave property, as cited in 
Chapter I,, specifies this incident. They "may be 
sold, transferred, and 'paivnedP They are "chattels 
personal, to all intents^ constructions and purposes 
whatsoever." 

"The slave, being a personal chattel^ is at all times 
liable to be sold absolutely, or mortgaged, or leased, 
at the will of his master. He may also be sold hy 
process of laiv for the satisfaction of the debts of a 



6-i THE AMERia\X SLAVE CODE. 

living, or the debts and bequests of a deceased mas- 
ter, at the suit of creditors or legatees." (Stroud's 
Sketch, pp. 25, 51.) 

"If a slave sold, remains -svitli the vender, lie is 
liable to be seized for his debtsJ' ("Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery, p. 5-i.) 

"Slaves are considered as jyoperti/, and in most of 
the States they are considered as chattels personal. 
They are therefore subject to those rules and regu- 
lations which society has estabhshed for the purchase 
and sale, and transmission from one to another, of 
that species of property. They therefore may he mort- 
gaged as personal property, or are the subjects of a 
qualified or conditional sale, to suit the wants of the 
owner or purchaser of them. They are declared to 
be personal estate by the Ee%dsed Code of Mississippi, 
379 ; Eevised Code of Virginia, vol. I., pp. 431-47. 
Indeed, they are considered the subjects of mortgage in all 
the States hy custom, and which exists in many of the 
States by express statutory provisions." By the 
Black Code of Louisiana, vol. I., Dig., p. 102, sect. 
10, it is declared that slaves shall be reputed and 
considered real estate ; shall be, as such, suhject to he 
mortgaged, according to the rules prescribed by law, 
and they shall be seized and sold as real estate. (lb.. 
Note, pp. 164-5.) 

" Slaves may be sold by creditors for debts of their 
owners, in all the States but Louisiana, where they 
cannot be separated from the land." (1 Martin's Dig., 
612, Act of July, 1806 ; cited in Wheeler s Law of 
Slavery, p. 41.) 



SALE OF SLAVES FOR DEBT. 65 

"The children of a female slave mortgaged, born 
after the execution of the mortgage, are as much 
liable to the demand of the mortgagee as the slave 
herself." (lb., p. 167.) 

In contrast with the preceding, we present the 
following : 

"Plantation slaves, not only in the Spanish and 
Portuguese, but in the French colonies also, are real 
estate, and attached to the soil they cultivate, par- 
taking therewith all the restraints upon voluntary 
alienation to which the possessor of the land is there 
liable, and they cannot be seized or sold by creditors 
for the satisfaction of the debts of the owner. It has 
already been stated that by the Code Nbir, art. 47, 
the husband cannot be sold without the wife, nor the 
parents without the children. Sales made contrary 
to this regulation, by process of law, under seizure 
for deUs, are declared void. (See Stephens' Slavery, 
68-9 ; Stroud's Sketch, p. 53.) 

It is evident that this feature of liabihty to seizure 
for the master's debt is, in many cases, more terrific 
to the slave than that which subjects him to the 
master's voluntary sale. The slave may be satisfied 
that his master is not willing to sell him — that it is not 
for his interest or convenience to do so. He may be 
conscious that he is, in a manner, necessary to his 
master or mistress, or that, being a favorite and tried 
servant, they would not sell him at any price. He 
may even confide in their Christian benevolence and 
moral principle, or promise that they would not sell 
him, especially that they would not thus separate 



6Q THE AMERICA:^' SLAVE CODE. 

him from liis wife and children. But all this affords 
him no security or ground of assurance that his mas- 
ter's creditor will not seize him, or his vrife or his 
children, against even his master's entreaties. Such 
occurrences are too common to be unnoticed, or out 
of mind. 

Advertisement in the Georgia Journal of January 2d, 1838. 

"Will be sold, the following property, to wit: 
one CHILD, by the name of James, levied on as the 
property of Gabriel Grunn." 

From the Scmtliern Whig, March 2, 1838. 

"Will be sold, in La Grange, Troup County, one 
negro girl, by the name of Charity, aged about ten 
or twelve years, as the 'pro]^e)-ty of Littleton L. Burk, 
to satisfy a Tnortgage fi. fa. from Troup Inferior 
Court, in favor of Daniel S. Robertson vs. said 
Burk." 

Neither the Court, the sheriff, the plaintiff, the 
defendant, nor the negro girl, appear to have been 
instructed in the literature which assures willins: 
dupes that the Slave Code is obsolete — a dead letter. 

From the Milledgeville Journal, Dee. 26, 1837. 

" Executors' Sale. — Agreeable to an order of the 

Court of Wilkinson County, will be sold on the first 

Tuesday of April next, before the Court-House door 

in the town of L'wington, OXE negro girl, about 

tico years old, named Eachel, belonging to the estate 

of William Chambers, deceased. Sold for the benefit 

of the heirs and CREDITORS of said estate. 

"Samuel Bell, 1 rw,„fo„.» 
"Jesse Peacock, f -^^^"^'^^- 



SALE OF SLAVES FOR DEBT. 67 

Here, again, the "cliattel principle" appears not 
to liave been regarded as "a mere metaphysical, 
speculative abstraction," as some would persuade us 
to believe it is. 

From the Natchez Courier, April 2, 1838. 

"Notice is hereby given that the undersigned, 
pursuant to a certain Deed of Trust, will, on Thurs- 
day, the 12th day of April next, expose to sale at 
the Court-House, to the highest bidder, for cash, the 
following negro slaves, to wit : Fanny, aged about 
twenty-eight years ; Mary, aged about seven years ; 
Amanda, aged about three months; Wilson, aged 
about nine mouths. Said slaves to be sold for the 
satisfaction of the debt secured in said Deed of Trust. 

"W.J. Mn^OR." 

The " legal relation" was here defined and exem- 
plified, as likewise in the following : 

Extract of a letter to a member ofc Congress fi'om a friend in Mis-" 
sissippi, published in the Washington Globe, June, 1837. 

" The times are truly alarming here. Many plan- 
tations are entirely stripped of their negroes and horses, 
by the marshal or sheriff". Suits are multiplying," 
&c. 

Truly alarming times, indeed, for slave mothers 
and their babes — for slave wives and their husbands. 
But of their alarms the writer, the pubhsher, and the 
readers generally, it may be presumed, thought no 
more than they did of the alarms of the "horses" 
associated and seized with them. 

In all this we have only the natural workings of 



08 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

the "legal relation;" tlie legality of whicli was 
understood and enforced by the sheriff. It were idle 
to talk of his act or of the act of the creditors as an 
abuse of the relation. The relation is that of owner 
and chattels, and nothing else. It would be absurd 
(not to say dishonest) for the law to sanction such a 
relation, and then leave the rights unprotected which, 
the relation implies. Were it true that such a relation 
existed, and that it was truly legal and valid, there 
would be manifest injustice to the attaching creditor, 
as well as to the voluntary slave vender, in the Code 
Koir. The truth is, no such "legal relation" can be 
valid ; and to this fact, the Code Koir gives its attesta- 
tion, by its veto upon the exercise of its involved 
rights. 

"We dismiss also this feature of the Slave Code, 
with the remark that, in respect to it, we find the 
people to be no better than their laAvs, and their 
usages no worse than "tne legal relation" that gives 
sanction to them. 



CHAPTER IV. 

INHERITANCE OF SLAVE PROPEETY, 

Slaves, as Property, are transmitted by Inheritance or by Will to Heirs at law 
or to Legatees.— In the distribution of Estates, they are distributed like other 
Property. 

This feature of the slave system, like all its other 
features, is derived from its cardinal principle of 
PROPERTY in the bodies and souls of men. Without 
this principle, the whole edifice falls to the ground. 
With it, the entire system, in all its parts, and entire, 
is sustained. 

We have already stated the law on this subject. 
The slave "may be sold" "at the suit of creditors 

OR LEGATEES." (StrOud, p. 5l?) 

A more specific recognition of this feature is found 
in a law of North Carolina, substantially copied by 
other States, in which, after prohibiting, in a great 
measure, the further introduction of slaves into their 
limits,* a proviso is added that "nothing in this act 

* It has already been seen that these prohibitions have not pre- 
vented an immense slave traffic between the States. In some of 
the States, these prohibitions have been repealed. 



70 THE AMERICAlSr SLAVE CODE. 

shall proliibit any citizen of this State who may ob- 
tain slaves, &c., by marriage^ gift^ ^^O'^V-, devise^ or 
descent^'''' "from bringing the slaves, &c., into this 
State by land or water." (Haj'ward's ]\ranual, 533-4. 
Act of 1794, chap. 2, (fee, &c., &c. Vide Stroud, p. 55.) 

This indicates what is the known fact, that slaves 
had previously been inherited in the several States. 

The inheritance of slave property appears to have 
occasioned much litisration in the courts, and accord- 

O 7 

ingly the topic occupies no little space in the reported 
decisions collected together in "Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery." 

In the case of Beatley vs. Judy, &c., in Kentucky, 
it was determined that the phrase "personal estate" 
in xoilh and contracts should be construed as embra- 
cing slaves. (2 Wash. Eep., 1-8.) The same in the 
case of Plumpton vs. Cook. (2 Marshall's Ky. Eep., 
450 ; copied by Wlieeler, p. 2.*) 

In the case of Banks, Admr., vs. Marksbury, it 
was decided that "the owner of a female slave may 
give her to one of his children, and \\\e future increase, 
(that is, unborn children !) to another.'''' (Wheeler, 
p. 28.) [The case is reported at length. We give 
here, as in many other instances, the brief marginal 
statement of the compiler.] 

* In our quotations from Wlieeler, Ave often (to save room) omit 
his statements of the names of the litigants, the judges, and the 
" Reports" from ■which he has copied. "We preserve these, in some 
instances, that the reader may be impressed Tvith the matterof-fact 
nature of the record, and not fancy himself reading " hr/al fiction." 
"Whatever maj' be said of statutes, the daily decisions of courts are 
not " obsolete," nor are they " theoretical abstractions." 



INHERITANCE OF SLAVES. 71 

In tlie case of Carroll et al. vs. Connet, (in Ken- 
tucky,) EOBINSON Ch. J., it was held that " The ad- 
ministrator is liable for failure to distribute slaves. 
Although for some j^urjooses slaves are declared by 
statute to be real estate, they are nevertheless intrin- 
sically personal, and therefore are to be considered 
as included in every statute or contract in relation 
to chattels which does not, in terms, exclude them. 
They are liable, as chattels, to the payment of debts. 
They may be attached as chattels, and they have 
invariably been treated as chattels, in both Virginia 
and Kentucky, so far as the rights and duties of 
administrators are concerned^ (Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery, pp. 37-8.) 

And yet Kentucky is one of the only two States 
in which the statutes have declared slaves to be real 
estate, a tenure which, if adhered to, would attach the 
slave to the soil, and prevent the separation of 
families. The practice, as sanctioned by custom and 
the courts, is in this case found to be less favorable 
to the slaves than the words of the statute, in their 
plain import. The people have been worse than 
their statutes, and the judges have conformed to the 
people. 

" Enlaws vs. Enlaws, Spring Term, 1821 ; 3 Mar- 
shall's Ky. Eep., 228. The Court held that the 
slaves of a female, immediately on the marriage, 
vest in the husband, and although she may survive 
him, her right to the slaves is not revived." 
(Wheeler, p. 39.) 

" A wife's estate in dower of slaves, by a former 



72 THE AMERIC^VX SLAVE CODE. 

husband, on lier marriage vests in her husband ; and 
her rigid to manumit them is gojie^ (lb., p. 182.) 

"Slaves are subject to dower, in all the States. 
Not only are they subject to doAvcr, but the widow's 
interest in them is protected by statutory provisions. 
K the husband manumits his slaves, whereby cred- 
itors and the dower are affected, the manumission is 
so far ineffectual, that the manumitted slaves may be 
sold for a period, and the proceeds applied to the 
creditors of the former owner and his widow." 
(Wheeler, p. 181.) 

" Slaves are devisable, like any other chattel. A 
distinction, however, exists, where slaves are con- 
sidered as real property. In these cases they pass 
immediately to the legatee, and not to the executor 
as personal estate." (Wheeler, p. 57.) 

" If a father, at the time of his daughter's mar- 
riage, puts a negro or other chattel into the possession 
of his son-in-law, it is, in law, a gift, unless the con- 
trary can be proven." (lb., p. 62.) 

"The increase" {i. e. the children) "of slaves born 
during the life of a legatee for life, belong to the 
ulterior legatee, who is the absolute owner." (lb., 

p. 23.) 

"By the Eevised Code of Mississippi, p. 50, slaves 
descending from an intestate may he sold by order of 
the Orphan's Court, where equal division cannot be 
made ; and persons holding life estate in slaves, or 
guardians for infants, are required to deliver a list of 
slaves to the register of the Orphan's Court, and also 
the increase, p. 51. And similar provisions exist in the 



INHERITANCE OF SLAVES. 73 

other States for tlie division of slaves." (lb., p. 
183.) 

On the same page appears, liowever, tlie follow- 
ing, whicli seems less inflexible. It appears, from 
tlie "Table of Cases," that the court was held in 
Virginia : 

"Held, by the Court, that an equal division of 
slaves in number and value is not always possible, 
and sometimes improper, Avhen it cannot be exactly 
done without separating infant childi-en from their 
mothers, which humanity forbids, and will not be 
countenanced in a court of equity ; so that a com- 
pensation for excess must, in such cases, be made and 
received in money." (lb.) 

Here, the humanity of the judge appears to have 
modified the statute. 

Every one is famihar with the phrases " inherited " 
or " entailed slave property." Such an one is said 
to have been " born to a slave inheritance," or " born 
a slaveholder." These phrases occur in almost every 
plea for the blamelessness of the slaveholder, and 
for the " innocency of the legal relation." " The 
man was born into it, and how can he be blamed for 
it ?" This plea is never more confidently lu-ged than 
by a class of clergymen who are forward to teach 
that all men are born sinners and shapen in iniquity ; 
but who would, nevertheless, be shocked at the 
impiety of the reprobate who should urge his " birth" 
in sin, his " inherited " or " entailed " depra\'ity, in 
excuse of his obstinate and voluntary transgression. 
Perhaps it never occurs to them that " inherited" and 
4 



74 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

"entailed" slaveholding, like other " inlierited " and 
" entailed" transgressions, incur guilt when thej are 
voluntarily adopted and cherished. In the case of 
any other " inherited" sin, they would readily make 
the requisite explanation. 

This feature of the " legal relation," deemed so 
" innocent," so capable of white- washing with the 
supererogation of its meritorious innocency the 
crimes of successive generations and Avhole nations 
of slave-breeders and slave-venders, with their ap- 
proving Senates and Synods, will be found, on a 
close scrutiny, to embody one of the most foul and 
damning features of the whole sj-stem — the feature 
of self-perpetuity — of self-transmission to the future ; 
the quality of seducing and cursing posterity — se- 
curing the sin and the shame, the wretchedness and 
the hopelessness of the unborn. It is an " innocent 
relation," forsooth ! because it embodies, and because 
(as is claimed) it even necessitates these results. 

No feature of the slave system is more terrific to 
the poor slave than this. The hazards of a volun- 
tary sale, by his master, he and his loved ones may 
escape. The dreaded mortgage, and creditor, and 
sheriff, may pass them by untouched. But there is a 
mortgage hanging over them, that all the gold of 
California cannot lift. There is a creditor whose debt 
against the master must be cancelled, but seldom 
without touching some of them. There is a sheriff, 
whose warrant is already out, who may seize at any 
day, and will soon seize, but probably not without 
toucliino- thon, if alive! The death of the master is 



INHERITANCE OF SLAVES. 75 

the close of their respite. They are liable to be " dis- 
tributed," like other "property," among the "heirs," 
whoever and wherever they may be, " for goods they 
are, and as goods they are esteemed," — " chattels per- 
sonal, in the hands of their owners and possessors, 

THEIR EXECUTORS, ADMINISTRATORS AND ASSIGNS, tO 

all intents, constructions, and purposes whatsoever." 
This is the very definition of an American slave, and 
there is no escape from the condition it describes, 
but by the " fanaticism of abolition." This is the 
" legal relation" too innocent to be questioned, claim- 
ing relationship with Abraham and Moses, the sanc- 
tion of Jesus and Paul ! 

From the Georgia Journal. 

" To BE Sold. — One negro girl, about eighteen 
months old, belonging to the estate of William Cham- 
bers, deceased. Sold for the purpose of distribution. 



" Jethro Dean, ) ^ , 
" Samuel Beall, j ^^ 



Here, again, the practice corresponds with the 
theory, and the people are in harmony with their 
laws. 

How the distribution of slave property among 
heirs and legatees is effected under the Code Noir, or 
where slaves are held as real estate, as in Louisiana, 
we are not minutely informed. If the soil and the 
slaves must remain together, a distribution would 
seem to require the whole to be sold, and to one 
purchaser. We doubt whether such a restriction 
obtains, at present, in that State. Under the old 



76 



THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 



feudal system, tlie estate, consisting of soil and serfe, 
was kept together bj"- tlie law of primogeniture, 
entailing it to the eldest son, in perpetuity. The 
repeal of that laAV has been justly regarded as a step 
in the march of human progress ; but if the " j)ecu- 
har institution" of slavery is to remain, humanity 
might, perhaj^s, invoke its re-enactment, as it might 
prevent the separation of slave famihcs, or rather, 
permit their existence. 



CHAPTER V. 

USES OF SLAVE PROPERTY. 

Slaves, as Property, may be used, absolutely by their owners at will, for 
their own profit or pleasure. 

Property is that wliicli may be tised by tlie owner. 
"The slave is one who is in the power of a master, 
to whorn he belongs." "Goods they are, and as goods 
they are esteemed." This is the law of the relation. 
"As goods," therefore, they may be used, while, like 
other goods, they "perish with the iising." 'Have 
I not a right to do what I will with mine own?' is a 
question affirming a prerogative universally claimed. 
Admit the validity of the ownership, and the right 
of use follows of course. If the "lega^ relation" be 
an innocent one, the right of use and the exercise of 
that right are innocent likewise, provided the use be 
a legitimate one. We shall see what uses are deemed 
legitimate by those who have shaped, defined, and 
administered "the relation." 

It is true that the use of property by the owner 
is limited by the rights of other persons. But slaves 
are not persons in the view of the law, for any pur- 



78 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

poses of benefit to them ; as -will hereafter be more 
fully shoAvn, The rights of a slave are not recog- 
nized, and no lunitation of the master's use of him 
can come from that quarter. "The slave" (says 
the law) "is entirely subject to the will of his mas- 
ter." Nothing, therefore, can jprevent the master from 
putting him to any use he pleases. 

It is also true, that the use of property by the 
owner is limited by the nature of that property. 
Thus, a living horse, or other domestic animal, may 
not lawfull}' be hacked and hewed to pieces, as a 
block of wood may be. The barbarity may be 
punished. The most that can be claimed for the 
Slave Code, on this point, is, that by placing slaves 
upon a level with other live cattle, it entitles them to 
the same kind and degree of protection. Beyond this, 
the Slave Code, so far as we know, never attempts 
or pretends to protect them. It knows them only 
as mere animals. Their rational and moral natures, 
not being recognized by the laws, can claim no legal 
protection. Sufficient evidence of this has already 
been adduced, but it wiU accumulate as we proceed. 
And it will be seen that as a mere animal, the slave 
has not equa! protection, in some respects, with other 
animals. 

We will specify some of the uses of slave property. 

1. A prominent use of slave property is unrequited 
slave labor. The hired laborer is employed. The 
slave laborer is used as a horse or an ox is used. 
Ilis labor is held to be the property of his owner. 
At this point he is degraded to the level of a brute, 



USES OF SLAVE PROPERTY. 79 

wlietlier moderately or excessively worked. The 
iise of a slave as a brute laborer is an injury and an 
insult. It is a denial of liis natui'e as a man, and of 
his rights as a free moral agent. 

"The end of slavery," said Judge Euffin, "is the 
profit of the master.'''' The slave "is doomed to toil, 
that otiiers may reap the fruits^ State vs. Mann. 
(N. Carolina Reports, p. 263. Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery, p. 246.) 

This honest judicial decision should shame the 
pretense that slaves are held for their own benefit. 

In a separate chapter, we shall look more directly 
into the particulars of slave labor, and in another, 
shall consider the withholding of wages. Additional 
light will then be thrown upon this use of slave 
property. In the mean time, it will be easy to show 
that in this use of slave property, in some of the 
slave States, it is systematically and deliberately so 
used as to be itsed up, and destroyed in a manner that 
would be shameful and wicked, even if brute beasts 
were the victims. 

Dr. Deming, a gentleman of high respectability, 
residing in Ashland, Richland county, Ohio, stated 
to Prof Wright, at New- York city : 

"That during a recent tour at the South, while 
ascending the Ohio river on the steamboat Fame, he 
had an opportunity of conversing with a Mr. Dickin- 
son, a resident of Pittsburg, in company with a 
number of cotton-planters and slave-dealers from 
Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Mr. Dickinson 
stated as a fact, that the sugar-planters upon the 



80 THE AiTEEICAX SLAVE CODE. 

sugar coast in Louisiana had ascertained that, as it 
was usually necessary to employ about ticice the 
amount of labor dui'ing the boiling season that was 
required during the season of raising, they could by 
excessive driving, day and night, during the boiling 
season, accomphsh the whole labor tcith one set of 
hands. By pursuing this plan they coidd afford to 
sacrifice one set of hands once in seven years! He 
further stated, that this horrible system was now 
practised to a considerable extent. The correctness 
of this statement was substantially admitted by the 
slaveholders then on board."' (Weld's "Slavery as it 
is," p. 89.) 

"The late Mr. Samuel Blackwell, a highly re- 
spected citizen of Jersey City, opposite the city 
of Xew-York, and a member of the Presbyterian 
Church, visited many of the sugar plantations in 
Louisiana, and says: "That the planters generally 
declared to him that they were obliged so to over- 
work their slaves, during the sugar-making season, 
(from eight to ten weeks,) as to USE THEM UP in 
seven or eight years. For, said they, after the process 
is commenced, it must be pushed without cessation, 
night and day, and we cannot afford to keep a suffi- 
cient number of slaves to do the extra work at the 
time of sugar-making, as we could not profitably em- 
ploy them the rest of the year." (lb.) 

Eev. Dr. Reed, of London, 'who went through 
Kentucky, Yirginia, and Maryland, in the summer 
of 1831, gives the following testimony: 

" I was told, confidently, from excellent authority^ 



USES OF SLAVE PROPERTY. 81 

that recently, at a meeting of planters in Soutli Caro- 
lina, the question was seriously discussed whether the 
slave is more jDrofitable to the owner, if well fed, well 
clothed, and worked lightly ; or, if made the most of 
ai once, and exhausted in some eight years. The 
decision was in favor of the last alternative. That 
decision will, perhaps, make many shudder. But to 
my mind, this is not the chief evil. The greater and 
principal evil is considering the slave as jproperty. 
If he is only property, and ray property, then I seem 
to have some right to ask how I may make that 
property most available.'''' ("Yisit to the American 
Churches," by Drs. Eeed and Mattheson, vol. II., 
p. 173.) 

Other testimony might be added. Southern news- 
papers have pubhshed the proceedings of Agricul- 
tural Societies, in which, after discussion, it had been 
agreed that the more profitable method was to ^' use 
np" a gang of negroes once in seven or eight years, 
and then purchase a fresh supply of the dealers. 

A terrible sacrifice of life arises from a change of cli- 
mate. A writer in the New-Orleans Argus, of 1830, 
says: "The loss by death, in bringing slaves from a 
northern climate, which our planters are under the 
necessity of doing, is not less than twenty-five per 
cent.^^ Advertisements hke the following are not 
uncommon : 

"I offer my plantation for sale. Also twenty fine 
acclimated negroes. 0. B. CoBB." {Yichshurg Reg., 
Dec. 27th, 1838.) 

" I will sell my Old Eiver Plantation, near Colum- 
4* 



82 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

bia, in Arkansas ; also one hundred and thirty accli- 
mated negroes. Bex. Hughes. — Port Gibson, 14th 
Jan." 

"Probate Sale. — Will be offered for sale, at 
jDublic auction, to the highest bidder, one hundred 
and thirty acclimated slaves. G. W. Keeton, Judge 
of the Parish of Concordia, La., March 22d, 1837." 

General Felix Houston advertises in the Natchez 
Courier^ April 6tli, 1838, " Thirty very fine accli- 
mated negroes.''^ (See Jay's Yiew, pp. 98, 99.) 

Dr. Eeed was correct in charging the murderous 
use of slave property to the principle or law of slave 
ownership^ which constitutes what is called "the legal 
relation." Such treatment may be called an " abuse," 
but is a result which will be almost certain to follow, 
where laborers can be owned and nsed^ instead of 
being bargained with and liired. Even on the low 
ground of "consequences," such a "relation" is to be 
condemned. 

2. Another prominent use of slave property, in 
the case of females capable of being mothers, is that 
of breeders of slaves. And if the tenure of slave 
property be legitimate, and the ownership valid, by 
what rule of law or of logic shall this use of slave 
property be condemned? The argument of Mr. 
Gholson, of Virginia, on that assumption, holds good. 
(See Chapter II.) If the owners of lands, of orchards, 
and of brood mares had a right to their products, 
why had he not a right to the products of the slave 
women he had purchased? Had not the Slave Code, 
the legislatures and the courts secured to him his 



USES OF SLAVE PROPERTY. 83 

claim upon tliem as " chattels personal, to all inteyits, 
constructions and j^^i^'J^oses whatsoever?" Might he 
not, with other grea,t statesmen,* affirm that " that 
is property which the law declares to he property," 
and that " two hundred years of legislation have 
sanctified and sanctioned negro slaves as property" ? 
Did he not sustain to those women the relation of 
owner? And had not Doctors of Divinity, Northern 
and Southern, attested the lawfulness and the inno- 
cency of sustaining the relation ? And how could 
there be a relation without its implied rights? Thus 
fortified, was not his inference warranted by his prem- 
ises, when he spoke as follows? (we quote again from 
his speech :) 

" The legal maxim of 'Partus sequitur ventrem^ is 
coeval with the existence of the rights of property, 
and is founded in wisdom and justice. It is on the 
justice and inviolability of this maxim that the mas- 
ter foregoes the service of his female slave ; has her 
nursed and tended during the period of her gestation, 
and raises the helpless and infant offspring. The 
value of the property justifies the expense, and I do 
not hesitate to say that in its increase consists much 
of our wealth." (Speech in Leg. of Ya.) 

The closing sentence indicates the extent and im- 
portance of this use of slave j)roperty. According to 
the estimate of Henry Clay as before cited, (Chap. II.,) 
this use (to "raise slaves" for the "Southern market") 
is of more pecuniary value to " the farming portion 

* Henry Cla}-. Speech in U. S. Senate, 1839. 



84 THE AMEEICAX SLAVE CODE. 

of the slave States" tlian all their agricultural opera- 
tions ! 

The value, indeed, cannot fall short of the receipts 
for exports of surplus slaves to the South. Professor 
Dew, afterwards President of William and Mary 
University, (Va.,) speaking of the slave-trade from 
Virginia, said: "It furnishes every inducement to 
the master to attend to his negroes, to excourage 
BREEDING, and to cause the greatest number of slaves 
to be raised," kc. "Virginia is, indeed, a negro- 
raising State for other States." To which may be 
added the far-famed announcement — " The noblest 
blood of Virginia runs in the veins of slaves." 

In the Charleston Mercury, the leading political 
paper of South Carolina, appeared the following ad- 
vertisement : 

" Negroes for Sale. — A girl, about 20 years of 
age, (raised in Virginia,) and her two female chil- 
dren, one four, and the other two years old — is re- 
markably strong and healthy — never having had a 
day's sickness, with the exception of the small-pox, 
in her life. The children are fine and healthy. She 
is very prolific in her generating qualities, and af- 
fords a rare opportunity to any person who wishes 
to raise a family of healthy servants for their own 
use. Any person wishing to purchase will please 
leave their address at the Mercury office." 

The coarseness of this language disgusts us, and so 
docs the language of Mr. Gholson. But the facts in- 
volved differ nothing from the statements of Henry 
Clay, as quoted in our chapter on the Traffic in Slaves. 



USES OF SLAVE PROPERTY. 85 

And whoever will take up and study the jiidicial 
decisions cited in "Wheeler's Law of Slavery" con- 
cerning "the increase of slaves," will find that the 
newspaper advertisements of which we have fur- 
nished a specimen, are merely descriptive of a busi- 
ness recognized and protected as respectable, in 
courts of justice. And this remark Avill be found to 
apply not merely to the supply raised for the inter- 
State slave-trade. The litigation reported in Mr. 
Wheeler's book under the head of " Increase of 
Slaves," is mainly that which grew out of neighbor- 
hood transactions and the inheritance of slave prop- 
erty. 

And we have already, in discussing the nature of 
slave ownership, (Chap. I.,) taken occasion to quote 
from Wheeler's Law of Slavery (p. 325) the express 
language of the judges, placing the issue of female 
slaves, when hired out for five years, upon the same 
footing, and to be awarded upon the same rules, as 
in the case of the increase of " brood mares'''' or other 
^'■female animals.^^ 

3. Another use of slave property (sometimes, 
probably, connected with the preceding) is indi- 
cated by advertisements of beautiful young mulatto 
girls for sale ; and by the fact that these commonly 
command higher prices than the ablest male labor- 
ers, or an}' other description of slaves. A reputed 
daughter of Thomas Jefferson was said to have been 
sold at auction in New-Orleans for one thousand 
dollars. Manj^ have been sold for $2,000. One young 
woman was sold at pubhc auction to a rich young 



86 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

planter for $7,500. It miist be an. able field hand 
that commands $800. 

Forced marriages of slaves with slaves, including 
second and third marriages after separations from 
former companions by sale, constitute a class of well 
attested facts. The Savannah Eiver Baptist Asso- 
ciation decided that in case of such separation of 
Baptist slave husbands and wives, it was lawful for 
them, without church censure, to form such new 
connections, "z?i obedience to their mci-sters,^^ whose 
right to enforce such arrangements was thus tacitly 
acknowledged. 

Forced concubinage of slave women with their 
masters and overseers, often coerced by the lash, 
constitutes another class of facts, equally undeniable. 
Vide Weld's " Slavery as it is," p. 15. " Eape com- 
mitted on a female slave is an offense not recognized 
by law." (MSS. by Judge Jay.) 

Such facts, in their almost interminable varieties, 
corroborate the preceding, and illustrate the almost 
innumerable uses of slave property ! 

4. Another use of slave property, and a very re- 
markable one, assures us that the Southern " owners" 
of this "peculiar" kind of property have ways of 
turning it to account that even Northern ingenuity 
could scarcely have devised, unless, indeed, it he a 
Yankee's invention. Assortments of diseased, dam- 
aged^ and disabled negroes, deemed incurable and 
otherwise worthless, are bought n.p, it seems, (cheap, 
no doubt, like old iron,) by medical institutions, to 
be experimented and ojDcrated upon, for purposes 



USES OF SLAVE PROPERTY. 87 

of " medical education" and the interests of " med- 
ical science!" The Charleston (S. C.) Mercury^ Oct. 
12, 1838, contained an advertisement, by Dr. T. 
Stillnian, on behalf of the " Medical Infirmary," set- 
ting forth its objects, and closing as follows : 

" To Planters and Others. — Wanted, fifty ne- 
groes. Any person, having sick negroes, considered 
incurable by their respective physicians, and wishing 
to dispose of them. Dr. S. will pay cash for negroes 
affected with scrofula, or king's evil, confirmed hy- 
pochondriasm, apoplexy, diseases of the liver, kid- 
neys, spleen, stomach and intestines, bladder and its 
appendages, diarrhoea, dysentery, &c. Tlie highest 
cash price will be paid, on apphcation as above," (viz., 
" Medical Infirmary, Ko. 110 Church street, Charles- 
ton.") 

6. It seems indeed difficult to foresee or imagine 
all the XLses to which slave property may be put by 
the owner. " The slave is entii-ely subject to the 
will of his master." He is supposed to have no con- 
science and no rights. What his " owner" commands 
him to do he must do. What he requires him to be 
he must be. What he chooses to inflict upon him 
he must suffer. He must never lift a hand in self- 
defense. He must utter no word of remonstrance. 
He has no protection and no redress. This will more 
fully be shown as we proceed. 

The slave, however pious, and whatever his scru- 
ples, must do the work allotted to him — it may be 
the drudgery of a tippling shop, a gambling house, 
a brothel, or a den of counterfeiters or shop-lifters. 



e» THE A>[ERICAN' SLAVE CODE. 

And lie must witness in silence wliatever lie sees 
there, if it be murder. He cannot testify against a 
white man. He is merely 'projperty TO BE USED ! 

6. A class of murders of slaves by slave masters 
maj as well be put down in this category. 

The monster, Lillburn Lewis, nej)hew of Thomas 
Jefferson, Avho chopped in pieces a living article of 
slave proiDcrty, in presence of his other slaves, only 
USED UP that article to awe the others into subjec- 
tion, as he told them. 

But this was " an abuse" of the relation, a viola- 
tion of the law ! Perhaps it was. In icords^ the law 
prohibits the murder of slaves. IIow much it intends 
or effects^ will be seen in another chapter. 

A slaveholder flogged a little slave girl, and i[)\\t 
her feet in the stocks. She Avas found dead. A 
prominent lawyer, of a respectable family, was asked 
"whether the murderer of this little helpless child 
could not be indicted." He coolly replied that " the 
slave Avas Mr. P.'s 2'>i'operty, and if he chose to suffer 
the loss, no one else had any thing to do with it." 
(Vide Weld's "Slavery as it is," p. 54.) 

The slave child Avas " propertA''," and had only 
been used ! "It is bclie\"cd that no record exists of a 
lohite man having been executed in the United States, 
simply for the murderof asZai-e." (MSS. by Judge Jay.) 

In another chapter this point Avill be examined. 

Again Ave find the people to be no better than 
their laAvs. If these jiractices are to be considei-ed 
unauthorized "abuses," the people are ivorse than 
their laAvs, for they arc practised Avith impunity. 



CHAPTEE YI. 

SLAVES CAN POSSESS NOTHING. 
Being Property themselves, they can own no Property, nor make any Contract. 

Man was created proprietor of the eartli, with 
dominion over the beasts of the field. The human- 
ity of the slave is denied, hj denying to him any 
share in this original right of human nature or capa- 
bility of its exercise. He is "not ranked among 
sentient beings, but among things." A chattel cannot 
be the owner of a chattel. The slave " can possess 
nothing nor acquire any thing but what must belong 
to his master." (Civil Code, Art. 35.) They " cannot 
take by purchase or descent." 

"Slaves have no legal rights in things, real or 
personal ; but whatever they may acquire, belongs, 
in point of laic ^ to their masters." (Stroud, pp. 25, 45.) 

" Slaves can make no contract," (lb., 25, 61.) 

" Slaves are incapable of inheriting or transmitting 
property." (Civil Code, Art, 945.) 

By the Eoman law, the slave might possess what 
was called his j^^cnUian^ or Avhat liis master might, 
by stipulation, accord to him, and which, having 



90 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

thus Stipulated, lie could not afterwards take from 
him. Bj this law, slaves acquired property, some- 
times embarked in commerce, redeemed themselves 
and amassed fortunes ; or, in other cases, without an 
absolute purchase of themselves, paid their masters 
an annuity, as the* 25rice of their services, and 
attended to their own affairs, Not so in republican 
and Christian America ! The "legal relation" here 
is another thing. The only excejDtion, approxima- 
ting the Eoman code in this particular, so far as we 
know, is found in the Civil Code of Louisiaxa, as 
follows : 

" All that a slave possesses belongs to his master, 
he possesses nothing of his OAvn except his peculium, 
that is to say, the sum of money or movable estate, 
ivMch his master chooses he should possess J ^ (Art. 175 ; 
see 1 Martin's Digest, 616.) 

Yet, in the same Code stands the folloAving : 

" Slaves cannot dispose of or receive by donation, 
mter vivos or mortis causa, unless they have been pre- 
viously and expressly enfranchised conformably to 
law, or unless they are expressly enfranchised by 
the act by which the donation is made to them." 
(Art. 1462.) 

" The earnings of slaves and the price of their 
service belong to their owners, who have their action 
to recover the amount of those who have employed 
them." (Louisiana Code of Practice, Art. 103.) 

Except in the permission of a j^cculiwn, the laws 
of the other States on this subject are similar to thor > 
of Louisiana. 



SLAVES CAN OWN NOTHING. 91 

South Carolina. — " Slaves cannot take by de- 
scent or jDurcliase." (4 Desaussiire's Cliancery Re- 
ports, 266, Bjniim vs. Bostwick.) 

North Carolina. — " Slaves cannot take by sale, 
or devise, or descent." "A devise of land to be rented 
out, for the maintenance of a slave, was adjudged to 
be void." (1 Cameron and Norwood's Eeports, 353 ; 
same decision, 1 Taylor's Eeports, 209.) 

Maryland. — A gift, bequest, or devise, made to 
a slave, by any one not his owner, would be void, 
(see Dulany's opinion, 1 Maryland Eeports, 561,) 
though such a devise of real or personal estate, made 
by the oicner of a slave, has been held to entitle him to 
freedom^ as the implied intention of the owner. (Hall 
vs. Mullin, 5 Harris and Johnson's Eeports, 190.) 

In " Wheeler's Law of Slavery" may be found 
ample evidence that this feature of the Slave Code 
(the incapacity of the slave to possess property) is 
not a dead letter, but recognized by the courts, and 
enforced whenever there is occasion, not only to the 
letter of the statute, but by an application of the 
principle and sioirit of the enactment, in a contin- 
gency which legislative sagacity did not, probably, 
foresee. 

A slave, for instance, accidentally found a sum of 
money, in bank bills, which some one took from him 
and carried to the bank. The oicner of the slave boy 
brought an action of trover against the bank for the 
sum, and recovered it by judgment of court. 

Judge Safltbrd said : 

" Our slaves can do nothing in their own right, 



92 THE AilERICAX SLATE CODE. 

can hold no property, can neither buy, sell, barter, 
nor dispose of any thing, without express permission 
from the master or overseer ; so that every thing they 
can possess or do is, in legal contemplation, on 
authority of the master." 

Judge Crenshaw said : 

" A slave is in absolute bondage ; he has no civil 
right, and can hold no property, except at the will 
and pleasure of his master. A slave is a rational 
being, and endowed with understanding and volition, 
like the rest of mankind ; and whatever he lawfully 
acquires, and gains possession of, hy finding or other- 
wise, is the acquirement and jDOSsession of the mas- 
ter. A slave cannot take property by descent or 
purchase." (Brandon et al. vs. Merchants' and 
Planters' Bank of Huntsville, 1 Stewart's Ala. Ee- 
port, 320 ; S. P. Bynum vs. Bostwick, 4 Desaussure, 
266 ; Wheeler's Law of Slavery, pp. 6, 7.) 

In the preceding decision, the manhood, the reason, 
the understanding, the volition of the slave are dis- 
tinctly recognized, and for the express purpose of 
claiming all the acquirements of such a being as the 
property of his master — equivalent to the claim of 
absolute proprietorship in the human soul itself! 
The theor}'- and the practice of slavery are here found 
to be in harmony, and the courts enforce the enact- 
ments of the legislatures. 

In a note to the preceding decision, Mr. Wheeler says, 
(p. 7 :) "These principles prevail in all the States, and 
arc taken from the civil law, and were adopted in all, 
excej^t Connecticut, and j^erhaps Massachusetts." 



SLAVES CAN OWN NOTHING. 93 

" Hall VS. Mullin, 5 liar, and John's Md. Eeport, 
190. The Court held that no legal contract, whatever, 
could be made with a slave, Avithout the consent of 
his master." (lb., p. 7.) 

"In Jackson ex. clem, the People vs. Lervej, 5 
Cowen's Rep., 397, the Court held that a slave at 
common law could not contract matrimony, nor 
could the child of a slave take by descent or inheri- 
tance." (lb., p. 7.) 

"Free Lucy and Frank, Fall Term, 1826, 4 Mon- 
roe's Eep., 167 ; Emmcrson vs. Howland, 1 Mason's 
Rep., 45. The Court held that contracts made by 
negroes while in slavery, do not bind them when 
liberated ; and consequently a plea by a free negro, 
that a writing sued on was delivered when he was a 
slave, is good." (lb., p. 190.) 

In a note on this topic, Mr. Wheeler says : " One 
general principle prevails in all the States, and in 
the British, Spanish, and Portuguese West Indies, 
and that is, that a slave cannot maJce a contract^ not 
even the contract of matmnoni/.^^ And he cites numer- 
ous authorities for the statement, (lb., p. 190.) 

The slave is thus taught that his promises and 
agreements are of no binding force ! Even the free 
negro, as has been seen, is taught the same lesson in 
respect to his former condition ! Yet those by whom 
these lessons are taught affect to marvel at the moral 
obtuseness of the negroes, and consider themselves 
as occupying a high moral eminence above them. 

A warrant for one thousand acres of land, issued 
to a slave in Tennessee, for mihtary services as a 



94 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

musician during the revolutionary war, Avas adjudged 
to be the property of his owner, in 1834. This de- 
cision was made against the claims of an heir of his 
former owner, Col. Patton, a revolutionary officer, 
who caused his slave to be enlisted. No claim ap- 
pears to have been set up on behalf of the slave. 
(See Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 229.) 

Though " a slave can make no contract " on his 
own account, yet his master may constitute a slave 
his agent for the most important pecuniary transac- 
tions. We once knew of a j^rominent public man, 
whose personal credit in his market toAvn was §o low 
that his written order on his merchant for fifty dol- 
lars' worth of goods was rejected ; but when his 
managing slave stepped forward and promised that 
the next loads of produce should be delivered in 
payment, the answer was : " Very well, Cuffee, if 
you say so, I'll deliver ten times the amount of 
goods." 

" Chastain vs. Bowman et al.. May Term, 1833, 
1 Hill's S. C. Reports, 276. The Court charged the 
jury that a slave might be the agent of his master, 
and if his agency was established, the master was 
bound. Yerdict for the plaintiff, and motion for a 
new trial. 

" Per Cur.^ Johnson J. — It is not questioned that 
a master may constitute his slave his agent, and I 
cannot conceive of any distinction between the cir- 
cumstances which constitute a slave and a freeman 
an agent. They are both the creatures of the prin- 
cipal, and act upon his authority. There is no con- 



SLAVES CAN" OV^N NOTHING. 95 

dition, however degraded, whicli deprives one of the 
right to act as a private agent. Motion dismissed." 
(Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 228.) 

It is certainly remarkable that a man should " have 
a right " to act as an agent for another who can have 
no right to act for himself. Equally remarkable is 
the plea that slaves cannot take care of themselves 
and must be benevolently superintended for their 
benefit, while they conduct the business of their 
masters. The slave is adjudged to be a mere thing, 
except where his master's interests or convenience 
require that he should be regarded a man. 

Another curiosity of slave j urisprudence deserves 
notice here. Although it is adjudged an offense 
against the State for a free white citizen to hold 
honest commerce with a slave, for the beneficial, 
and useful purposes of life, to emplo}- a slave to 
labor and to pay him just wages — an offense, like- 
wise, for the master of a slave to permit and author- 
ize such transactions, (as will be shown presently,) 
yet, according to Wheeler, "It is not an offense, 
either at common law or by statute, to gamble with 
slaves." This statement is his marginal title to the 
law case of " The State vs. Pemberton and Smith, 
Dec. Term, 1829, 2 Devereaux's K Carolina Rep., 
281," in which, " after verdict for the State, his Honor 
Judge Strange arrested the judgment, being of opin- 
ion" as before stated. "From this judgment the 
solicitor for the State appealed," but the judgment 
of the Court below was afl&rmed. (Wlieeler's Law 
of Slavery, p. 4-11.) 



96 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Witli exception of Louisiana, as already men- 
tioned, our American slave States have signalized 
themselves by special enactments to inohihit the pos- 
session of the smallest amount of property by the 
slave, even with the consent of the master! The 
Greeks, the Eomans, the ancient Germans, the Poles, 
with the Portuguese, the Spanish and the French of 
our own times, had provided, both by law and by 
custom, for the possession of property by the slave, 
which could not be seized by his master. In the 
British West Indies, though no written law had 
sanctioned the custom, a public sentiment had in- 
dulged the slave in the enjoyment of some petty 
possessions, and had forbidden the master to inter- 
fere with them. 

But this lenity was manifestly inconsistent with 
the absolute and unlimited chattelhood of the slave. 
A principle was seen to be involved, which, if toler- 
ated in an age of inquiry, would undermine the 
whole system. If the slave could possess property, 
he could dispose of it ; he could make contracts ; he 
might contract marriage ; he might become a man, 
and, becoming such, cease to be a slave. The safety 
of the entire fabric required that not one stone in 
the edifice should be missing. And besides, the 
idea that a slave can possess jjroperty, however trifling 
the amount, is the idea that the slave has rights, an 
idea that must by no means be permitted to enter 
the mind of the slave, or be entertained by the com- 
munity around him. Especially must this not be 
done in a land wherein human rights have been 



SLAVES CAN OWN NOTHING. 97 

discussed and proclaimed. The jealousy, the vigi- 
lance, the sagacity, the apphances of a grim des- 
potism are never so severely tasked as in the pres- 
ence of the spirit and the doctrines of freedom. 
This single thought solves the enigma, and repels 
the opprobrium, of an unprecedented tyranny in a 
land wherein are taught the principles of liberty. 
A despotism, in such a country, must be doubly 
despotic or die instantly. The reader has, in these 
suggestions, our philosophy of the remarkable enact- 
ments that follow. 

South Carolina. — " It shall not be lawful for 
any slave to buy, sell, trade, &c., for any goods, &c., 
without a license from the owner, &c. Nor shall 
any slave be permitted to keep any boat, periauger, 
or canoe, or raise and breed for the benefit of such 
slave any horses, marcs, cattle, sheep, or hogs, under 
pain of forfeiting all the goods. Sec, and all the boats, 
periaugers or canoes, horses, mares, cattle, sheep, or 
hogs. And it shall be lawful for anij jyerson ichatso- 
ever to seize and take away from an}' slave, all such 
goods, &c., boats, &c., &c., and to deliver the same 
into the hands of any justice of the peace, nearest to 
the place where the seizure shall be made, and such 
justice shall take the oath of the person making such 
seizure, concerning the manner thereof; and if the 
said justice shall be satisfied that such seizure has 
been made according to law, he shall pronounce and 
declare the goods so seized to be forfeited, and order 
the same to be sold at public outcry ; one half of 
the moneys arising from such sale to go to the State, 
5 



98 THE AMEEICAN SLAVE CODE. 

and the other half to him or them that sue for the same." 
(James's Digest, 385-6 ; Act of 1740.) 

Georgia. — The statute is nearly the same as in 
South Carolina, with this additional prohibition: 
Lest the master should sometimes permit the slave 
to hire himself to another for his own benefit, the 
State imposes a penalty of thirty dollars " for every 
weekly offense on the part of the master, unless the 
labor be done on his own premises." (Prince's 
Digest, 453, 457.) 

Kentucky. — The same, with a slight modifica- 
tion. (2 Litt. & Sui. Digest, 1159-60.) 

Tennessee. — Similar. (Act of October 23, 1813, 
chap. 135.) 

Virginia. — If the master shall permit his slave 
to hire himself out, it is made lawful for any person, 
and the duty of the Sheriff, &;c., to apprehend such 
slave, &c., and the master shall be fined not less than 
ten dollars, nor more than twenty, &c. (1 Revised 
Code, A. D. 1819, 374-5.) 

Mississippi. — Same as in Georgia and Kentucky, 
before stated. {Revised Code, 375.) 

A slave, in ^[ississippi, is forbidden to raise cotton 
for his own use ; and should the master permit him 
to do so, he incurs a fine of fifty dollars. {Revised 
Code, 379.) 

Further : '* If any master, &c., of a slave, license 
such slave to go at large and trade as a freeman, he 
shall forfeit the sum of fifty doUars for each and 
every offense." {Revised Code, 374. See also North 
Carolina.) 



SLAVES CAN OWN NOTIIIXa. 99 

An equal fine is imposed upon any master con- 
victed of permitting his slave to keep " stock of any 
description^ (Act of Jan. 29, 1825 ; Pamph. Laws 
of Mississippi, of 1825.) 

Missouri. — Same as Virginia, before stated. (2 
Missouri Laws, 743 ; Havward's Manual, 634) 
Also, same as Mississippi, third specification, just 
stated. (2 Missouri Laws, 743.) 

XoRTH Caeolixa. — Act of 1779 : " All horse? 
cattle, hogs, or sheep, that, one month after the pas- 
sage of this act, shall belong to any slave, or be of 
any slave's mark, in this State, shall be seized and 
sold by the County Wardens, and applied, one half 
to the supjDort of the poor of the county^ and the other 
half to the informer T (Hay ward's Manual, 526.) 
Same or similar law also in Mississippi. {Revised 
Code, 378.) Same also in Maryland. (Act of 1723, 
chap. 15, sect. 6 ; Kilty's Laws of Maryland.) 

And so the tchite poor are to be fed by plundering 
the colored poor ! 

Maryland. — See last preceding item. Also Mis- 
sissippi, third item there stated. See Kilty's Laws 
of Maryland, Act of April, 1787, chap. 33. 

By act of April sessions, 1787, any person who 
shall permit and authorize any slave belonging to 
him or herself, &;c., to go at large himself or herself 
within this State, shall incur the penalty of live 
pounds ($13.33) current money p)^^' '^nonth, except 
ten days at harvest. The penalty was increased to 
twenty dollars, excepting, however, an additional ten 
days in harvest. (Act of December Sessions, 1817. 



100 TUE A.^IEKICAX SLAVE CODE. 

chap. 104, sect. 1.) By both acts, a slave being a 
pilot is not included in the prohibition. 

" No person shall trade, barter, commerce, or in 
any \\'ay deal ^vith any servant or slave, &c., &c., 
without leave or license first had from such servant 
or slave's master, dame, or overseer, for his or her 
so doing, under penalty of two thousand pounds of 
tobacco," &c. (Laws of Maryland, 1715, chap. 44, 
sect. 11, 12, 13.) 

DiSTEiCT OF Columbia. — " Under exclusive juris- 
diction of Congress." Same as in Maryland. 

It may easily be conceived that this law would 
be inconvenient and disadvantageous to many own- 
ers of slaves in or near maritime towns, where job 
labor, or labor by the day or the hour, might be 
picked up by the laborers themselves, better than by 
their owners. In such locahties the strict letter of 
the law could not always be rigidly enforced. The 
public convenience, the wants of every body who 
must needs employ transient laborers, would inter- 
pose obstacles. It is known that in "Wilmington, 
N. C, a port from which much lumber used to be 
shipped, which needed much cooper's labor in the 
preparing, the work was often or commonly carried 
on by slaves, who paid a large monthly stipend to 
their owners. Stevedores, (who stow away cargoes,) 
caulkers, riggers, and perhaps ship-blacksmiths, and 
even sail-makers, being slaves, were allowed the 
same privilege. The custom had an elevating effect 
on the slaves, and was therefore looked upon with 
jealousy by masters not interested in such arrange- 



SLAVES CAN OWN NOTHING. 101 

ments. This was tliirtj 3-cars ago. The present usages 
are unknown to tlic Avriter, who ghadly presents this 
one brighter spot in the picture. But it must not be 
forgotten that all the swqjlus earnings of these slaves, 
if an?/, over and above their support, (after having 
paid ten or fifteen dollars monthly to their masters 
for their time,) is nevertheless, in the eye of the law, the 
property of their masters, and they can take away, 
if they please, whatever they find in their possession. 

The convenience and interest of the planter might 
permit or even direct the slaves to cultivate small 
patches of vegetables near their cabins, for food, by 
Sunday labor, for the most part. In Spanish Florida 
this was a custom. It may obtain to a small extent 
in other States, without serious violation of the letter 
or spirit of the statutes quoted. Such small and 
transient supplies would hardly be accounted posse.^- 
sions or property. 

That the statutes quoted are not commonly re- 
garded a dead letter, may be seen by reports of 
judicial decisions, as compiled by Mr. AVheeler, who 
expressly refers to the statutes as the ground of the 
decisions. And in a note he adverts to some of 
their provisions which we have not yet mentioned : 

"By the Eevised Code of Virginia, (A. D. 1819,) 
vol. I., J). 442, sect. 81, it is declared that a slave going 
at large, or hiring himself out, may be committed by 
a magistrate, who may fine the owner, and may order 
the slave to he solcl^ " Also, by the Bevised Code of 
Mississippi, 374, sect. 25" — "in certain cases, the 
slave may he sold. And by sect. 20, any citizen may 



102 THE AMERICANS' SLAVE CODE. 

seize a slave offering articles for sale, and take him 
before a justice of the peace, and the justice shall 
order the slave to he ichijyped, and forfeit the article TO 
THE PERSON APPREHEXDIXG THE SLAVE"! (AVheel- 

er's Law of Slaverj', p. 153.) 

It is jDreposterous to supjDOse that such modern 
enactments, holding out such inducements to inform- 
ers and i3rosecutors, should remain a dead letter. 
Mr. Wheeler adds: 

" Similar provisions are to be found in the statute 
books of those States where this species of property is 
recognized.'' (lb.) 

In the same note he had before said : 

" The statutes of the States contain a prohibition 
with a penalty against the slave going at large, or 
hiring himself out." {^^. 152.) 

lie cites the law of Alabama, in particular ; and 
Judge Hitchcock, of Alabama, says of his book : 
" I have no doubt it will be a valuable work for the 
use of the members j^articularly of the SouUie^-n bar 
of the United States." He understands, of course, 
that these laws are to be enforced, as in the following 
instance recorded in the same " valuable" auxiliary 
of " the Southern bar" : 

" Jarrett vs. Higbee, 5 Monroe's Ky. Eeport, 546. 
Jarrett brought trespass against Higbee for taking 
and imprisoning his slave." " Defendant admitted 
that when he took the slave up he produced a pass 
from his master" which gave him permission "to 
bargain and trade for himself until the lii"st day of 
May next ; and also for to pass and repass from Liv- 



SLAVES CAN OWN NOTHING. 103 

ingston county, Kentucky, to Monongahela county, 
State of Virginia," &c., dated 26tli Sept., 1822. The 
following is from the judicial decision : 

''Per Car., Bibb Ch. J. That the master shall 
not let loose his slave, with a permit for him to vio- 
late the established order and economy prescribed hy law 
in relation to slaves, is due to society.''^ " Without abridg- 
ing the lawful powers of the master to use his prop- 
erty in the slave, it may safely be declared that this 
paper, given b}^ the master in (to) the slave, violated 
that duty which he, as owner, owed to the laws of 
society." " These permissions, and such acts of the 
slave, are violations by master and slave of the pol- 
icy, spirit, and letter of the statute of 16th Dec, 
1802, against permitting the slaves to go at large 
and hire themselves." " Such licenses would tend 
to beget idle and dissolute habits in the particular 
slaves so indulged, as well as in others, and to lead 
to depredations upon the property of others, and to 
crimes and insubordination. To such hcenses and 
indulgences society are not boimd to submit; the 
master has no right to give such." '' It teas not a 
lawful pass or permit. It teas a species of temporary 
and unlawfid manumission,^'' &c. (Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery, pp. 269-70.) 

. In other 'language, the statute and its enforcement 
are deemed necessary to the seciudty and the per- 
petuity of slaver3^ 

It deserves especial notice that this decision Avas 
made in Kentucky, where slavery is said to be ex- 
hibited in its mildest form, and where the privileges 



104 THE AMERICAN' SLAVE CODE. 

of slaves are greater tlian in most of tlie otlier 
States. 

It is not known tliat in any otlier nation, ancient 
or modern, the robbery of tlie poor has been carried, 
by system, to such a pitch as to prohibit the mass 
of the laboring people fi'om holding the smallest 
article of property as their own, or from making any 
bargain or contract. 

And it ought to be noticed and remembered that 
this condition of things has resulted from an ex- 
treme solicitude to protect from danger the so-called 
" legal relation" of owner and owned, of master and 
slave. 



CHxVPTER YII. 

SLAVES CANNOT MARRY. 

Being held as Property, and incapable of making any Contract, they cannot 
contract Marriage recognized by Law. 

Men may forget or disregard the rules of logic in 
tlieir reasonings about slavery, but the genius that 
presides over American slavery never forgets or 
disregards them. From its well-defined principle of 
human chattelhood it never departs, for a single mo- 
ment. If any thing founded on falsehood might be 
called a science, we might add the system of Ameri- 
can slavery to the list of the strict sciences. From 
a single fundamental axiom, all the parts of the sys- 
tem are logically and scientifically educed. And no 
man fully understands the system, who does not 
study it in the light of that axiom. 

The slave has no rights. Of course he, or she, 
cannot have the rights of a husband, a wife. The 
slave is a chattel, and chattels do not marry. " The 
slave is not ranked among sentient beings, but among 
things," and things are not married. 

"Slaves are not people, in the eye of the law. 
5* 



106 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

They have no legal personality." So said Mr. Wise. 
So, by their votes, said the Federal Congress. But 
none except "people" and "persons" ever marry. 

" The slave is one who is in the power of a master 
io zvhom he belongs/' How, then, can the slave marry ? 
" The legal relation of master and slave," with all 
the vestal robes of its spotless innocency, and saintly 
Biblical paternity, has never, in this coimtnj, been held 
to be compatible with marriage. So early as in colo- 
nial times, when parish ministers, all over New-Eng- 
land, owned slaves, it was held by learned civilians, 
in o-ood old Connecticut, that when a slave master, 
though inadvertently, gave verbal heense to a female 
slave to marnj, the license made her free. Being mar- 
ried, she was not a slave, and the husband bore oif 
his prize in triumph, before her master ! 

The same doctrine has always been held (though 
differently enunciated) at the South. Slave mothers 
are there licensed by their masters to be "breeders," 
not wives, and thus they are retained as slaves. 

"A slave cannot even contract matrimon}-, the 
association which takes place among slaves, and is 
called marriage, being properly designated by the 
word contuhernium^ a relation which has no sanctity, 
and to which no civil rights are attached." (Stroud's 
"Sketch of the Slave Laws," p. Gl.) 

"A slave has never maintained an action against 
the violator of his bed. A slave is not admonished 
for incontinence, or punished for fornication or adul- 
tery ; never prosecuted for bigamy, or petty treason 
for killing a husband being a slave, any more than 



SLAVES CANNOT MARRY. 107 

admitted to an appeal for murder." (Opinion of Dan- 
iel Dulaney, Esq., Attorney General of Maryland. 
1 Maryland Reports, pp. 561, 563.) 

"Slaves were not entitled to the conditions of 
matrimon}', and therefore they had no relief in cases 
of adultery; nor were they the j^roper objects of 
cognation or affinity, but of quasi-cognation only." 
(Dr. Taylor's "Elements of the Civil Law," p. 429.) 

"It is clear that slaves have no legal capacity to 
assent to any contract. With the consent of their 
master they may marry, and their moral power to 
agree to such a contract or connection- cannot be 
doubted; hut while in a state of slavery it cannot pro- 
duce any civil effect^ because slaves are deprived of 
all civil rights. Emancipation gives to the slave his 
civil rights, and a contract of marriage, legal and 
valid by the consent of the master, and moral assent 
of the slave, from the inoment of freedom^ ALTHOUGH 
DORirANT DURING SLAVERY, produccs all the effects 
Avhich result from such contract among free persons." 
(Opinion of Judge Matthews, case of Girod vs. Lewis, 
May Term, 1819 ; 6 Martin's "Louisiana Reports," p. 
659. Wheeler's "Law of Slavery," p. 199.) 

The most favorable inference from this ingenious 
decision is, that the joint action of master and slave 
can legalize a slave's marriage ichen he ceases to he a 
slave ! 

The obligations of marriage are evidently incon- 
sistent with the conditions of slavery, and cannot be 
performed by a slave. The husband promises to 
protect his wife and provide for her. The wife prom- 



108 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

ises to be the lielp-meet of her husband. They mu- 
tually promise to live with and cherish each other, 
till parted by death. But what can such promises 
by slaves mean? The "legal relation of master and 
slave" renders them void ! It forbids the slave to 
protect even himself. It clothes his master with au- 
thority to bid him inflict deadly blows on the woman 
he has sworn to protect. It prohibits his possession 
of any property wherewith to sustain her, Ilis labor 
and his hands it takes from him. It bids the woman 
assist, not her husband, but her owner ! Xav ! it 
gives him unlimited control and full possession of 
her own person, and forbids her, on pain of death, 
(as will be shown,) to resist him, if he drags her to 
his bed ! It severs the plighted pair, at the will of 
their masters, occasionally, or for ever ! The inno- 
cent "legal relation" of slave-ownership does or per- 
mits all this, and without forfeiting clerical favor, or 
a high seat in the Church, or in the Senate, or Presi- 
dential chair. Wliat, then, can the marriage vows 
of slaves mean ? 

The laws annulling slave marriage are explicit, as 
has been seen. The corresponding position of the 
judiciary, as attested by the Maryland Kcports, has 
been adduced. Will any one inquire whether or 
no, in this particular, the Code be a "dead letter"? 
or whether the institution of marriage among slaves 
may not have survived the annulling action of the 
legislatures and the courts? As a recognized "Ic' 
gal relation," most assuredly the marriage relation 
among slaves does not and cannot exist. The petted 



SLAVES CANNOT MARRY. 109 

" legal relation" of owner and slaves crowds it off 
from the platform of human society. The iico " legal 
relations" cannot coexist. A choice must be made 
between the two. And those who will still persist 
in affirming the iunocency and the validity of the 
" relation" of slave owner, are bound, if sincere and 
truthful men, to repudiate the "relation" of slave 
marriage. The Savannah River Baptist Association 
had the nerve and the consistency to do this. 

"In 1835, the following query relating to slaves 
was propounded to the Savannah River Baptist 
Association of ministers: Whether, in case of in- 
voluntary separation of such a character as to pre- 
clude all future intercourse, the parties may be 
allowed to marry again ?" 

"Answer. — That such separation, among persons 
situated as our slaves are, is, civilly, a separation by 
death, and they believe that, in the sight of God, it 
would be so viewed. To forbid second marria2;es in 
such cases, would be to expose the parties not only 
to greater hardships and stronger temptations, but 
to church censure for acting in obedience to their masters, 
who cannot be expected to acquiesce in a regulation 
at variance with justice to the slaves, and to the 
spirit of that command Avhich regulates marriage 
between Christians. The slaves are not free agents, and 
a dissolution by death is not more entirely without 
their consent and beyond their control than by such 
separation," 

The Church is here seen submitting, with com- 
placency, to that feature of the Slave Code that 



110 THE AMEEICAN SLAVE CODE. 

annuls marriage ! "WTiat the Soutliern Baptists liave 
avowed, tke other religious sects there practise. 

Some of the facts stated concerning the " uses of 
slave xjropertif illustrate the absence of slave marriage. 
And so do the statistics of the domestic slave-trade. 
The restored institution and sanctity of marriage 
would cut off the supplies that gorge the slave 
markets. 

The Presbyterian Synod of Kentucky, in their 
address, have given us their testimony to the general 
fact and its effects. They say : 

The system ' ' produces general licentiousness among 
the slaves. Marriage, as a civil ordinance, they can- 
not enjoy. Our laws do not recognize this relation 
as existing amoug them, and, of course, do not en- 
force, by any sanction, the observance of its duties. 
Indeed, until slavery waxeth old, and tendeth to 
decay, there cannot be any legal recognition of the 
marriage rite, or the enforcement of its consequent 
duties. For^ all the regulations on this subject icould 
limit the master's absolute EIGHT OF PEOPERTY in the 
slaves. In his disposal of them he could no longer 
be at liberty to consult merely his own interest. He 
could no longer separate the wife and the husband 
to suit the convenience or interest of the purchaser, 
no matter how advantageous might be the terms 
offered." " Hence, aU the marriages that coidd ever 
be allowed them, would be a mere contract, violable 
at the master's pleasure. Their present quasi mar- 
riages are continually thus voided. They are, in 
this wav, broufifht to consider their matrimonial 



SLAVES CANNOT MARRY. Ill 

alliances as a tiling not binding, and they act accord- 
ingly. We are then assured by the most unquestion- 
able testimony that licentiousness is the necessary 
result of our system." (Address, pp. 15, 16.) 

" Chastity is no virtue among them ; its violation 
neither injures female character in their own estima- 
tion, nor in that of their master or mistress. No 
instruction is ever given — no censure pronounced. I 
speak not of the world. I speak of Christian families 
generallyJ'' (Lexington, Ky., Luminary.) 

Even in Puritan New-England, seventy years ago, 
female slaves, in ministers' and magistrates' families, 
bore children, black or yellow, without marriage. 
No one inquired who their fathers Avere, and nothing 
more was thought of it than of the breeding of sheep 
or swine. We had the facts from those who well 
remembered them. 

The universal testimony concerning "slave quar- 
ters" connected with plantations is, that "the sexes 
are herded together, promiscuously, like beasts." 

Said a sister of President Madison to the late Rev. 
George Bourne, then a Presbyterian minister in 
Yirginia: "We Southern ladies are complimented 
with the name of wives ; but we are only the mis- 
tresses of seraglios." 

The report of the Presbyterian Synod of Georgia, 
December, 1833, sustains, on this general subject, 
the testimony of the Synod of Kentuck}^ 

We have seen a well-authenticated account of a 
respectable Christian lady at the South, who kept a 
handsome mulatto female for the use of her genteel 



112 THE americ.\:n' slave code. 

son, as a method of deterring liim, as slie said, from 
more indiscriminate and vulgar indulgences. Un- 
doubtedly lie passed current in tlie first circles of 
respectable young ladies. In our chapter on the uses 
of slave property, this item ■would have been in 
place. 

The rapid and constant bleaching of colors, at the 
South, assures us that there is no exaggeration in 
these pictures. And if the Synod of Kentucky were 
not mistaken, the innocent "legal relation" of slave 
ownership is to be held responsible for it all. Where 
the laws annul marriage, we may be certain that 
" the people are not better than their laws." 



CHAPTER VIII. 

SLAVES CAXXOT CONSTITUTE FAMILIES. 

Being Property, "Goods" and " Chattels Personal," to all intents, construc- 
tions and purposes whatsoever, they have no claim on each other — no security 
from Separation— no Marital Rights— no Parental Rights— no Family Govern- 
ment — no Family Education — no Family Protection. 

The family relation originates in tlie institution of 
marriage, and exists not witliout it. We have 
already proved that slaves cannot liave families or 
be members of families, by proving that they cannot 
be married. To this latter point, in its connection 
with the former, we cite the words of Judge Jay : 

"A necessary consequence of slavery is the absence 
of the marriage relation. No slave can commit 
bigamy, because the law knows no more of the mar- 
riage of slaves than of the marriage of brutes. A 
slave may, indeed, be formally married, but so far as 
legal rights and obligations arc concerned, it is an 
idle ceremony." " Of course, these laws do not 
recognize the parental relation, as belonging to 
slaves. A slave has no more legal authority over 
his child than a cow has over her calf" (Jay's In- 
quiry, p. 132.) 



114 THE AilEEICAX SLAVE CODE. 

The fact tliat the slave, as a chattel personal, may 
be bought, sold, transported from one place to 
another, mortgaged, attached, leased, inherited, and 
"distributed" in the settlement of estates, shows 
plainly that slaves cannot constitute families. 

" In the slaveholding States, except in Louisiana, 
no law exists to prevent the violent separation of 
parents from their children, or even from each 
other." ' (Stroud's Sketch, p. 50.) 

" Slaves may be sold and transferred from one to 
another without any statutory restriction or limita- 
tion, as to the separation of parents and children, 
&c., except in the State of Louisiana." (Wheeler's 
Law of Slavery, p. 41.) 

This has been the condition of American slaves 
in every j^eriod of our history, since their first intro- 
duction among us. John AYoolman, the philanthro- 
pist, a minister of the Society of Friends, residing 
in New-Jersey, bears the following testimony con- 
cerning the slaveholders of his times, (A. D. 1757 :) 

" They often part men from their wives by selling 
them far asunder, which is common when estates are 
sold by executors at vendue." (Journal of the Life 
of John Woolmau, London edition, p. 7-4.) 

At a later period than this, according to a wcU- 
authenticated tradition in the neighborhood, a Con- 
gregational minister at Hampton, Conn., (Rev. Mr. 
Moseley,) separated by sale a husband and wife who 
were both of them members of his own church, and 
who had been, by his own officiating act as a minis- 
ter, united in marriage. Yet no legal or ecclesiasti- 



NO FAMILY RIGHTS. 115 

cal proceedings grew out of the transaction. Some 
thought it a hard case, but the sufferers were only 
negroes and slaves. 

It is the common understanding at the South, 
that slaves do not constitute families. It is the com- 
mon understanding of the country at large. The 
American Bible Society, many years ago, proposed 
to supply each family in the United States with a 
Bible. After a long effort, it was announced by the 
Society that the great work was completed. It was 
afterwards ascertained that no part of the supply 
went to the then two and a half millions of slaves. 
The Society made no apology for its mistake, nor 
acknowledged that it had committed any. Public 
sentiment in general (with exception of abolition- 
ists) attributed to them no error. The nation knew 
nothing vihoxit families of slaves! 

The practice corresponds with the theory. The 
statement that follows is from Sarah M. Grimke, 
daughter of the late Judge Grimke, of Charleston, 
S. C: 

"A slave who had been separated from his wife, 
because it best suited the convenience of his owner, 
ran away. He was taken up on the plantation 
where his wife, to whom he was tenderly attached, 
then lived. His only object in running away was 
to return to her ; no other fault was attributetl to 
him. For this offense he was confined in the stocks 
six weeks, in a miserable hovel, not weather -tight. 
He received fifty lashes iveehhj during that time, was 
allowed food barely sufficient to sustain him, and 



116 THE AMEllICAX SLAVE CODE. 

when released from confinement, was not permitted 
to return to liis wife. His master, although himself 
a husband and a father, was unmoved by the 
touching appeals of the slave, who entreated that he 
might only remain with his wife, promised to dis- 
charge his duties faithfully; his master continued 
inexorable, and he was torn from his wife and 
family. The owner of this slave was a professing 
Christian, in full membership with the church, and 
this circumstance occurred while he was in his 
chamber, during his last illness." (Weld's "Slavery 
as it is," p. 23.) 

The following is from Mrs, Angelina Grimke 
Weld, sister of the preceding witness : 

"Chambermaids and seamstresses often sleep in 
their mistresses' apartments, but Avith no bedding at 
all. I know of an instance of a woman who has 
been married eleven years, a.nd yet has never been 
allowed to sleep out of her mistress's chamber. This is 
a great hardship to slaves. When we consider that 
hoix^e slaves are rarely allowed social intercourse 
during the day, as their work generally separates 
them, the barbarity of such an arrangement is obvi- 
ous. It is peculiarly a hardship in the above case, 
as the husband of the woman does not ' belong ' to 
her 'owner,' and because he is subject to dreadful 
attacks of illness, and he can have but little atten- 
tion from his wife in the day. And yet her mistress, 
who is an old lady, gives her the highest character 
as a faithful servant, and told a friend of mine that she 
was entirely dependent on her for all her comforts; 



NO FAMILY RIGHTS. 117 

she dressed and undressed her, gave her all her food, 
and was so necessary to her that she could not do 
without her. I may add that this couple are ten- 
derly attached to each other." 

" I know an instance in which the husband was a 
slave, and the wife was free. During the illness of 
the former, the latter was allowed to come and nurse 
him ; she was obliged to leave the work by which 
she made a living, and come to stay with her hus- 
band, and thus lose weeks of her time, or he would 
have suffered for want of proper attention ; and yet 
this ' owner ' made her no compensation for her ser- 
vices. He had long been a faithful and a favorite 
slave, and his owner was a woman very benevolent 
to the poor whites." " She, no doubt, only thought 
how kind she was to allow her to come and stay so 
long in her yard." (lb., p. 56.) 

" Persons who own plantations and yet live in the 
cities often take their children from them as soon as 
they are weaned, and send them' into the country ; 
because they do not want the time of the mother 
taken up with attendance upon Jier own children^ it 
being too valuable to the mistress. As a favor she 
is sometimes permitted to go to sec them once a year. 
So, on the other hand, if the field slaves happen to 
have children of an age suitable to the convenience 
of the master, they are taken from their parents and 
brought to the city. Parents are almost never consult- 
ed as to the disposition to he made of their cJiildren, and 
they have as little control over them as have domestic ant- 
maU over the disposal of their young. Every natural 



118 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

and social feeling and affection are violated ivith indif- 
ference. Slaves are treated as thougli they did not 
possess them." (lb., pp. 56-7.) 

If siicli be the condition of domestic or lionse ser- 
vants, in the best and most refined families of the 
Sonth, what mnst be the condition of field slaves, 
under the direction of overseers, on the plantations? 
"Among the gangs there are often young women, 
who bring their children to the fields, and lay them 
in a fence" corner while they are at work, only bemg 
permitted to nurse them at the option of the over- 
seer. When a child is three Aveeks old, a woman is 
considered in working order. I have seen a woman, 
with her yonng child strapped to her back, laboring 
the whole day beside a man, j^erJiaj^s the father of the 
child, and he not permitted to give her any assist- 
ance, himself being under the whip." (Testimony of 
L. Sapington, a native of Maryland. lb., p. 49.) 

On page 157 of the same book may be found the 
particulars of the public execution of a negro in a 
barbarous manner, by burning and beheadmg, after 
which his head was stuck up on a pole. His crime 
was the killing of a white man. The provocation 
was that the white man " owned his wife, and was m 
the habit of sleeping with her. The negro said he 
killed him, and he beheved he should be rewarded 
in heaven for it." 

The bearing of "the legal relation" of slave own- 
ership upon the \famihf relation may be seen by 
such advertisements as the following, which abound 
in the Southern papers. They are selected from 



NO FAMILY EIGHTS. 119 

about thirty similar ones in "Weld's " Slavery as it 
is," pp. 16^166 : 

From the Richmond Enquirer, Feb. 20, 1838. 

"$50 Eeward. — ^Ran away from the subscriber, 
bis negro man Pauladore, commonly called Paul. I 
understand Gen. B. Y. Hayne* has jiurclia-sed his 
wife and children from H. L. PiNCKNEY, Esq.,f and 
bas tbem now on his plantation at Goose-creek, 
where, no doubt, the fellow is frequently lurhing. 

"T. Davis." 

" $25 Reward. — Ran away from the subscriber, a 
negro woman named Matilda. It is thought she 
may be somewhere up James River, as she was 
claimed as a ivife by some boatman in Goochland. 

" J. Alvis." 

"$10 Reward for a negro woman named Sallj^, 40 
years old. "We have reason to believe said negro to 
be lurking on the James River Canal, or the Green 
Spring neighborhood, Avhere, we are informed, her 
husband resides. Polly C. Shields. 

''Mount Elba, Feb. 19, 1838." 

From the Savannah Georgian, July 8, 183Y. 

" Ran away from the subscriber, his man Joe. He 
visits the city occasionally, where he has been har- 
bored by his mother and sister. I will give one hun- 
dred dollars for proof sufficient to convict his harborers. 

"R. P. T. MoxGix." 

* Ex-Governor of South Carolina, and U. S. Senator. 
\ Member of Congress from South Carolina. 



.^^ 



120 THE AMEKICAN SLAVE CODE. 

We add another, on page 156 : 

From the Wilinin;/to}i (X. C.) Advertiser of July 13, 1838. 

" Ran away, my negro man Richard. A reward 
of $25 will be paid for his apprehension, DEAD or 
ALIVE. Satisfiictory proof only will be required 
of his being KILLED. He has with him, in all 
probability, HIS WIFE ELIZA, icho ran away from 
Col. Tliompson., now a resident of Alabama, about 
the time he commenced his journey to that State. 

" DuRAJSTT H. Rhodes." 

We have some reason to believe that this Rhodes 
was originally from New-England. AVlicn he visits 
the North he will probably tell his friends that he 
has never known any cruel treatment of slaves. 
Should he dine with the parish pastor, the result 
would perhaps be a sermon on '' the innocent legal 
relation !" 

The hair-splitters in logic will nevertheless per- 
sist in admonishing us to distinguish between the 
" relation" and its " abuse." But what, we demand, 
must be the nature of a " relation" that is constantly 
producing such fruits ? 

Undoubtedly there are slaveholders who would 
not thus advertise slaves. But if, in refraining, they 
are governed by any moral principle, it must be a 
principle at variance with the "legal relation" of 
slave-ownership which authorizes such acts and in- 
terposes no check or disapprobation of them. The 
very idea of slayc-oionership naturally suggests the 
right of doing such things. And when slave-owner- 



NO FAMILY RIGHTS. 121 

ship is held to be legalized, and is dignified with the 
name of a " legal relation " — and when these results 
(which some call "abuses") are neither forbidden 
nor discountenanced by the authorities that establish 
the said "legal relation," it is sheer sophistry to 
attempt discriminating between them so as to ap- 
prove the one and condemn the other. 



CHAPTER IX. 

UNLIMITED POTVER OF SLAVEHOLDERS. 

The Power of the Master or " Owner" is virtually unlimited — The submission 
required of the Slave is unbounded — The Slave being "Property" can have no 
protection against the Master, and has no remedy or redress for injuries in- 
flicted by him. 

This proposition is substantially involved in the 
legal definition of slavery, as presented in our first 
cliapter. The proof and illustration of it has been 
gradually evolving as we have proceeded thus far. 
It will continue to accumulate as we shall in future 
chapters examine the topics of slave labor, slave 
sustenance and clothing, slave punishments, and the 
intellectual and religious condition of slaves. At 
every step, the slave will have been found wholly 
subject to his master, dependent upon him, and de- 
fenseless. In this chapter we shall aim only to pre- 
sent, in a condensed form, the precise doctrine of the 
Slave Code on this subject. 

If the slave be the absolute property of his master 
— " entirely subject to his will " — " incapable of being 
injured" — " chattels personal, to all intents, construc- 
tions, and purposes whatsoever" — "not ranked 



POWER OF THE MASTER. 123 

among sentient beings, but among things " — tlie sub- 
jects of absolute purchase and sale — of seizure for 
debt — of inheritance and distribution — incapable of 
possessing property — " not entitled to the conditions 
of matrimony "—" not capable of constituting fami- 
lies " — (and all this has been shown) — then the mas- 
ter is indeed absolute, and the slave defenseless, of 
course. And any attempt by the Legislature or by 
the Courts to afford him protection, would be, in 
effect, an attempt to subvert " the legal relation of 
master and slave," and overturn the tenure of slave- 
ownership entirely. 

The question before us is, whether any such at- 
tempts have been made, and if so, how much, in a way 
of limitation and protection, has been accomplished. 

We repeat, here, a quotation before made from 
Judge Stroud : " It is plain that the dominion of 
the master is as unlimited as that which is tolerated 
by the laws of any civilized country in relation to 
brute animals — to quadnipeds, to use the words of 
the civil law." (Stroud's Sketch, p. 24.) 

We quote further and still more specific state- 
ments of the law, from the same writer : 

"The master may determine the kind, and degree, 
and time of labor to which the slave shall be sub- 
jected. 

" The master may supply the slave with such food 
and clothing only, both as to quantity and quahty, 
as he may think proper or find convenient. 

" The master may, at his discretion, inflict any 
punishment upon the person of his slave. 



124 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

" All tlie power of the master over his slave may 
be exercised not by himself ouly in person, but by 
any one whom he may depute as his agent. 

" xi slave cannot be a party before a judicial tri- 
bunal, in any species of action, against his master, 
no matter how atrocious may have been the mjuiy 
received from him. 

" Slaves cannot redeem themselves, nor obtam a 
change of masters, though cruel treatment may have 
rendered such change necessary for their personal 

safety." 

" Slaves being objects of j^^operty, if injm-ed by 
others, their oicners may bring suit, and recover 
damage for the injury." (Stroud's Sketch, p. 2o.) 
To this we will add : 

The master may wholly forbid and prevent tlie 
education, the moral and rehgious instruction of his 
slaves— their attendance on religious meetings and 
rehgious worship, either among themselves or at 
meetings conducted by white persons. 

There is not a slave in the United States that can 
claim these benefits as legal rights, or that can enjoy 
these privileges, in any degree, except with the leave 
of their " owners''' or their agents. 

There is not a slave-owner in the United States, 
however ignorant, vulgar, degraded, immoral, and 
irreligious, that does not hold this authority over 
each and all of his slaves, however pious or mtelh- 
gent they may be. And this authority, involved in 
slave-ownership, is part and parcel of " the legal 
relation of master and slave." 



POWER OF THE MASTER. 125 

There is not a slave State, or slave Territory or 
District under the Federal jurisdiction, that does not, 
by its Slave Code, extend its sanction audits guaranty 
to this power of the slave-owner. 

We speak here only of the power of the individual 
who holds slaves. The laws forbidding education and 
the free exercise of religion Avill be considered in 
another connection. 

"A statu liber " (a slave minor, entitled to freedom 
at the age of twenty-one) has (in the mean time) 
" no action at law for ill treatment.'''' Dorothee vs. 
Coquillon et al, Jan. Term, 1829. (19 Martin's 
Louisiana Eep,, 350. Wheeler's Law of Slavery, 
pp. 108-9.) 

No resistance must be made by a slave to his 
master. 

"TF/M7e the institution of slavery exists, every thing 
like resistance to the master's lawful authority should 
be decisively checked. Strict subordination must be 
exacted from the slave, or bloodshed and murders 
will unavoidably ensue. The laws of the slave- 
holding States demand, however, a much larger 
concession of power to the master than is here 
granted : they demand that THE LIFE of the slave 
shall be in the MASTER'S KEEPING— that the 
slave, having the physical ability to avoid the inflic- 
tion of a barbarous and vindictive punishment by his 
master, shall not be permitted to do so." (Stroud's 
Sketch, p. 97.) 

We reserve a quotation from Prince's Digest and 
from several statutes, until, in treating of the civil 



126 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

relations of tlie slave, we shall use them to prove 
wore than our present argument requires, viz. : that 
the same absolute submission of the slave is required 
by the laws, not merely towards the " owner" and 
his agent, but towards " all tclnte persons /" 

Judge Euffin, of North Carolina, in the case of 
State vs. Mann, decided as follows : " The power of 
the master must be absolute, to render the submission 
of the slave 'perfect. It would not do to allow the 
rights of the master to be brought into discussion in 
the courts of justice. The slave, to EEMAIN a slave, 
must be sensible that there is NO APPEAL from 
his master." (2 Devereaux's N. Carolina Eep., 
263.) 

This justifies our statement that " the legal rela- 
tion of master and slave " is responsible for all this 
despotic power. 

In "Wheeler's Law of Slavery, pp. 2-44-8, there is 
a full report of the opinion of Judge Euffin, from 
which we have taken the preceding extract. We 
shall revert to it again, and make further extracts, 
when, in another chapter, we come to treat of 
" Punishments of Slaves by the owners and hirers." 
An examination of that topic will more fully illus- 
trate the general proposition at the head of this 
chapter, for the correctness of which "\^'e here cite a 
few personal testimonies. 

" The whole commerce between master and slave 
is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous pas- 
sions, the most unremitting despotism on the one 
part, and degrading submission on the other." 



POWER OF THE MASTER. 127 

" Thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyr- 
anny,''^ &c. (Jefferson.) 

" I knew a gentleman of great benevolence and 
generosity of character," " speak of breaking down 
the spirit of a slave, under the lash, as perfectly 
right." (Angelina Grimke Weld, " Slavery as it 
is," p. 54.) 

" There was vo laio for the negro, but that of the 
overseer's whip." (L. Sapington, lb., p. 49.) 

The Savannah Eivcr Baptist Association ap- 
provingly recognized the unlimited authority of the 
master, when they maintained his authority to annul 
slave marriages, and to compel new sexual connec- 
tions between Baptist husbands and wives Avhom he 
had forcibly severed ! The people are here found 
to be no better than their laws, and the Church no 
better than the people. Hence they consider the 
"legal relation an innocent one." It stands precisely 
on their own moral level. 

This chapter may serve as a key to a number of 
the chapters that follow, as it contains the imnciple 
upon which their specifications are based, the absolute 
authority of the master. Those chapters, in their turn, 
will furnish illustrations and evidences of the truth 
of this. 



CHAPTER X. 

LABOR OF SLATES. 

The Slave, being a Chattel, may be worked at the discretion of his Owner, as 
other working Chattels are. 

If the Legislature of oue of our Northern States 
should enact a law restricting farmers to a specified 
number of hours per day, in which their oxen and 
horses should be worked ; and if the Act should be 
prefaced with a preamble, stating that many farmers 
were in the habit of over-working their cattle, it 
would be thought a severe reflection upon the farm- 
ers. A stranger would conclude that they were an 
inhuman as well as a short-sighted class of people, 
to treat their working beasts in that manner. They 
would eagerly read the Act, to sec how many hours 
were allowed as a relief to the poor beasts. And 
they would necessarily infer that the practice had 
been to work the cattle a longer time than that pre- 
scribed by the law. 

Let us now look at some of the laws of the slave 
States. 

South Carolina, (Act of 17-40.)— " ^Yhereas, 
many owners of slaves, and others who have the 



LABOR OF SLAVES. 129 

care, management, and overseeing of slaves, do con- 
fine them so closely to hard labor that they have not suf- 
ficient time for natural rest, Be it therefore enacted, 
That if any owner of slaves, or other persons, who 
shall have the care, management, or overseeing of 
slaves, shall work or put any such slave or slaves to 
labor more than fifteen hours in twenty-four hours, 
from the 25th day of March to the 25th day of Sep- 
tember; ov more than fourteen hours in twenty-four 
hours, from the 25th day of September to the 25th 
day of March, every such person shall forfeit any 
sum not exceeding twenty pounds nor under five 
pounds current money, for every time he, she, or 
they shall offend herein, at the discretion of the jus- 
tice before whom the complaint shall be made." (2 
Brevard's Digest, 243.) 

How much longer than fourteen or fifteen hours per 
day, in winter and summer, the South Carolina plant- 
ers had been in the habit of working their slaves, we 
are left to conjecture ! But we know that " the laws 
of Maryland, Virginia, and Georgia forbid that the 
criminals in their penitentiaries shall be compelled to 
labor more than ten hours a day," (Jay's Inquiry, 
p. 130 ;) and not exceeding 7ii7ie hours in some por- 
tions of the year, and eight during the three other 
months, (Stroud's Sketch, p. 29.) In Jamaica, (before 
emancipation,) " besides many holidays which are 
by law accorded to the slave, ten hours a day is the 
extent of the time which the slave is compelled, 
oi'dinarily, to work." (2 Edwards' W. Indies, book 
iv., chap. 5, &c.) 
6* 



130 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Georgia, (Act of 1817.) — "Any owner of a slave 
or slaves, who shall cruelly treat such slave or slaves 
by unnecessary or excessive whipping, by withhold- 
ing proper food and nourishment, hy requirinrj rjreater 
labor from such slave or slaves than he or she or they 
may be able to perform, by not affording proper 
clothing, xclierehy the health of such slave or slaves 
may be injured or impaired^ every such owner or own- 
ers of slaves shall, upon sufficient information being 
laid before the grand jury, be by said grand jury pre- 
sented, whereupon it shall be the dut}' of the attor- 
ney or solicitor general to prosecute said owner or 
owners, who, on conviction, shall be sentenced to 
pay a fine, or be imprisoned, at the discretion of the 
Court." (Prince's Digest, 376.) 

In this act, the ^^ owner'''' only is specified, and not 
the overseer, or agent. 

Louisiana, (Act of July, 1806.) — "As for the 
hours of work and rest Avliich are to be assigned to 
slaves in summer, the old usages of the territory 
shall be adhered to, to wit : The slaves shall be al- 
lowed half an hour for breakfast during the whole 
year ; from the first day of ]\[ay to the first day of 
November the}'- shall be allowed two hours for din- 
ner ; and from the first day of November to the first 
day of Mav, one hour and a half for dinner.- Pro- 
vided, however, that the owners who will themselves 
take the trouble of causing to be prepared the meals 
of their slaves, be, and they are herebv authorized 
to abridge, by half an hour ])cr day, the time fixed 
for their rest." (1 Martin's Digest, 610-12.) 
5 



LABOR OF SLAVES. 181 

This relic of "the old usages" under the Spanish 
and French laws may be considered, like the Louisi- 
ana laws before quoted, an exception to the general 
code of American Slavery. Yet even here the hours 
of beginning and ending the day's labor are not spe- 
cified, and consequently, the hours of labor, per day, 
are not limited nor ascertained. The known custom 
of night- work in boiling sugar is not touched by this 
statute. 

In Georgia and in Mississippi, there are laws for- 
bidding the unnecessary labor of slaves on the Sab- 
bath. — This is all the information before us. In 
most of the slave States, there are no laws limiting 
slave labor. (See Stroud, p. 26.) 

One single consideration is sufficient to show that 
the limitations just quoted are of no practical value. 

No SLAVE AND NO FREE COLORED PERSON, IN THE 

SLAVE States, can be a witness against a white 
PERSON. (lb., 27.) Slaveholders would not be for- 
ward to prosecute each other for ill treatment of 
slaves. And many of the non-slaveholding whites, 
at the South, are a servile and degraded class, not 
daring to offend the slaveholders. 

The celebrated Greorge Whitefield, in a "Letter to 
the Inhabitants of Marjdand, Virginia, North and 
South Carolina," in 1739, (after having travelled 
among them,) says : " Your slaves, I believe, work 
as hard, if not harder, than the horses whereon you 
ride. These, after their work is done, are fed, and 
taken proper care of, but many negroes, when 
wearied Avith labor in your plantations, have been 



132 THE AMEEIC.VX SLATE CODE. 

obliged to grind their own corn, after their return 
home." 

John Woohnan, in his Journal, under date of 1757, 
speaks of the labor of slaves as "heavy, being fol- 
lowed at their business in the field by a man with a 
whip, hired for that purpose." (Life of Woolman, 
p. 71.) 

The following are specimens of a great amount of 
similar testimony recorded in Weld's " Slavery as it 
is," p. 35 and onward : 

" So laborious is the task of raising, beating, and 
cleaning rice, that had it been possible to obtain 
European servants in sufficient numbers, thousands 
and tens of thousands of them must have perished." 
(History of Carolina, vol. I. p. 30.) 

Hon. Alexander Smythe, of Ya., in a speech in 
Congress on the Missouri question, January 28, 1820, 
argued, on the ground of humanity, in favor of ex- 
tending slavery into Missouri, that the slaves would 
be more com/ortahle there than in the older States, 
where they are "forced to incessant toil," "hard- 
worked," &c. K you "hem them in where they are," 
you " doom them to hard labor." It would be " «r- 
ti'eme cruelty to the blacks." 

Henry Clay, in 1831, in a conversation with James 
G. Birney, expressed a belief (contrary to his former 
impressions) that at the for South, the births among 
the slaves were not equal to the deaths. He related 
what he had heard and believed, that an overseer in 
Louisiana "worked his hands so closely, that one of 
the women broucrht forth a child Avhile engaged in 



LABOR OF SLAVES. 133 

tlie laboi's of tlie field." He was also told of a plan- 
tation containing from "twenty to thirty young 
Avomen in the prime of life,'' and the proprietor told 
him there had not been a child born among them for 
the last two or three years, although they all had 
husbands. 

We have before us much more testimony to the 
same point ; also, to the fact, that the slaves are com- 
monly " obliged to work from daylight till dark, or 
as long as they can see." 

" Every body here (Natchez, Miss.) knows over- 
driving to be one of the most common occurrences. 
The planters do not deny it, except, perhaps, to 
Northerners." (A. A. Stone, Theological Student.) 

In our Chapter V. on the " Uses of Slave Property," 
it was shown how coolly and deliberately gangs of 
slaves are used up on the sugar j)lantations of Louis- 
iana, once in seven or eight years. In Mr. "Weld's 
book, before us, we have many testimonies that cor- 
roborate the general fact. We spare room for only 
one, which comes on the authority of Rev. John O. 
Choules, Baptist minister, once of New-Bedford, 
Mass., afterwards of Buffalo, New- York. " While 
attending the Baptist Triennial Convention at Rich- 
mond, Va., in 1835," says Mr. C, "I had a conver- 
sation with an ofiicer of the Baptist church in that 
city, at whose house I was a guest. I asked him if 
he did not apprehend that the slaves would eventually 
rise and extermin^ite their masters? 'Why,' said 
the gentleman, ' I did use to apprehend such a catas- 
trophe, but God has made a providential opening, a 



134 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE, 

merciful safety valve, and now I do not feel alarmed, 
in the prospect of what is coming.' ' "What do you 
mean,' said Mr, Choules, 'by Providence opening a 
merciful safety valve?' 'Why,' said the gentle- 
man, ' I will tell you. The slave-traders come from 
the cotton and sugar plantations of the South, and 
are willing to buy vp more slaves than we can part 
Avith, We must keep a stock for the purpose of rear- 
ing slaves, but we part with the most valuable, and 
at the same time the most dangerous; and the demand 
is very constant, and is likely to be so, for when they 
go to those Southern States, the average existence is 
ONLY Fr\^E YEARS!" 

The people, including church members, are not 
better than their laws. 



CHAPTER XI. 

FOOD, CLOTHIKG, AND DWELLINGS OF SLAVES. 

The Slave, as a Chattel, is fed or famished, covered or uncovered, sheltered 
or unsheltered, at the discretion or convenience of his Owner, like other 
working Animals. 

Louisiana.' — "Every owner sTiall be lield to give 
liis slaves the quantity of provisions hereinafter spe- 
cified, to wit, one barrel of Indian corn,* or, the equi- 
valent thereof in rice, beans, or other grain, and a 
pint of salt, and to deliver the same to the slaves, in 
kind, every month, and never in money, under 
penalty of a fine of ten dollars for every offense." 
(1 Martin's Digest, p. 610. Act of July 7, 1806.) 

"The slave who shall not have, on the property 
of his owner, a lot of ground to cultivate on his 
own account, shall be entitled to receive from said 
owner one linen shirt and pantaloons for the sum- 
mer, and a linen shirt and woollen greatcoat and 
pantaloons for the winter." (1 Martin's Digest, 610.) 
Neither the quantity nor the quality of the "lot of 



* Meaning a flour barrel full of Indian corn in the ear, equal to 
about li bushels of shelled corn. 



136 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

ground " is specified, nor the amount of time to be 
allowed for tilling it. 

XoRTH Carolina. — "In case any slave or slaves, 
who shall not appear to have been fed and clothed 
according to the intent and meaning of this Act, that 
is to say, to have been sufficiently clothed, and to 
have constantly received for the preceding year an 
allowance of not less than a quart of corn^ per day, 
shall be convicted of stealing any corn, cattle, &c., &c., 
from any person not the owner of said slave or 
slaves, such injured person shall and may maintain 
an action of trespass against the master, owner, or 
possessor of such slave, &c., and shall recover his or 
her damages." (Hayward's Manual, 524-5.) 

Georgia. — The Act of 1817 (as quoted in the last 
previous Chapter on Labor) pro\'ide3 for the jDunish- 
ment of "owners" of slaves who "by excessive whip- 
ping, by toithholding proper food and sustenance, by 
requiring greater labor," &c., shall "cruelly treat" 
such slaves, "whereby the health of such slave, &c., 
may be injured or impaired^ 

Another Act, of Dec. 12, 1815, is as follows: 

"Sect. 1. From and after the passing of this Act, it 
shall be the duty of the inferior courts of the several 
counties in this State, on receiving information, on 
oath, of any infirm slave or slaves in a suffering con- 
dition, from the neglect of the owner or owners of 
said slave or slaves, to make particular inquiries into 



* It will be observed that in ueither of these legal rations of 
food is an}' mention made of meat. 



FOOD — CLOTHING SHELTER. 137 

the situation of such, slave or slaves, and render such, 
relief as they in their discretion shall think proper. 

"Sect. 2. The said courts may and are hereby 
authorized to sue for and recover from the owner or 
owners of sucti slave or slaves, the amount that may 
be appropriated for the relief of such slave or slaves, 
in any court having jurisdiction of the same ; any 
law, usage, or custom, to the contrary notwithistand- 
ing." (Prince's Digest, 460.) 

South Carolina. — ''In case any person, &c., who 
shall be owner, or who shall have the care, govern- 
ment, or charge of any slave or slaves, shall deny, 
neglect, or refuse to allow such slave or slaves, imder 
Ms or her charge, sufficient clothing, covering, or 
food, it shall and may be lawful for any person or 
persons, on behalf of said slave or slaves, to make 
complaint to the next neighboring j ustice in the pa- 
rish where such slave or slaves live, or are usually 
employed, and the said justice shall summon the 
party against whom such complaint shall be made, 
and shall inquire of, hear, and deterifline the same; 
and if the said justice shall find the said complaint to 
be true, or that such person will not exculpate or clear 
himself from the charge hy his or her oivn oath, which 
such, person shall be at liberty to do, in all cases 
where positive proof is not given of the offense, such 
justice shall and may make such, orders upon the 
same, for the relief of such slave or slaves, as he in 
his discretion shall think fit ; and shall and may set 
and impose a fine or penalty on any person who may 
ofiend in the premises, in any sum not exceeding 



138 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

twenty pounds, current mone}^, for each offense, to 
be levied by warrant of distress and sale of the offend- 
er's goods,'' &c. &c. (2 Brevard's Digest, p. 241. 
Similar in Louisiana, 1 Martin's Digest, 638-40.) 
On these enactments we remark : 

1. They embrace the legislation of only /our States. 
The other slaveholding States, so far as we are in- 
formed, have never j^^'eteitded to prescribe to the slave 
owner the kind or amount of food he must furnish 
his slaves. He can starve them if he pleases to do 
so, and there is no law to prevent it. 

2. Considering that the slave can bring no suit 
against his master ; that he is unprovided with a pro- 
tector, and that neither the slave nor any other colored 
person can testify against a white man ; and that, in 
case of any interference in his behalf, whether success- 
ful or otherwise, the slave still remains "entirely sub- 
ject to the will of a master to whom he belongs," and 
who can avenge himself upon him with impunity in 
secret, the very next day, it is quite certain that such 
enactments can avail little or nothing for his benefit, 
while he remains a slave. 

3. Aside from all this, the law of North Carolina 
was evidently designed for the benefit, not of the 
slave, but of the "persons" from whom a hungry 
slave might "steal" a subsistence. It prescribes no 
relief to the slave, and no punishment to his master, 
but only subjects him to the payment of "damages" 
for the food his slave has eaten ! Just as in the case 
of an unruly horse or ox that should break into a 
neighbor's crib ! It does not even provide for the 



FOOD — CLOTHING SHELTER. 139 

hungry slave's exemption from punishment by his 
master or by the magistrate, for his "stealing" to 
appease hunger. Tliere is no humanity in this law. 
It is a monument of the barbarity of its framers and 
of the slaveholders. 

4. The Georgia Act of 1817, strictly construed, 
imposes no punishment on a master who shall 
" cruelly treat" his slave by "excessive whipping," 
or by withholding proper food, or by "requiring 
greater labor," &c. All these acts of "cruelty" must 
be combined in each instance, or the statute fails to 
apply to the case. Even then, it is not reached, 
unless "the health" of the slave be "injured or 
Impaired." There may be "cruelty" by "excessive 
whipping," by hunger, and by excessive labor, but if 
the subject of all this "cruelty" retains his "health," 
the "cruelty" is not to be punished. 

5. The Georgia Act of 1815 applies only to the 
case of " mfirrii slaves." Other slaves " in a suffering 
condition from the neglect of the owner" are not 
provided for. It requires " information on oath,^^ 
(which no colored person can give,) before a legal 
inquiry can be commenced ! The facts must be first 
proved before the process can begin, and proved, 
too, without the testimony of the sufferer ! It shall 
be " the duty''' of the courts to render such relief as 
they think proper. From whence the supply is to 
be obtained, unless from the pockets of the judges, 
does not appear. (We have copied the entire act.) 
They are not authorized to order an execution 
against the delinquent "owner" on their judgment. 



140 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Instead of this, the judges are authorized (not di- 
rected) to become suitors themselves, as a "court," 
in ANOTHER court, to collect of the owner the 
amount of the -appropriation, if they can ; and if 
not, put up with the loss as they can, costs and all ! 
Where shall we find a parallel to this farce ? 

6. The South Carolina Act must also be useless for 
the want of " positive proof," (as the slave cannot 
testify,) in the absence of which the defendant is 
cleared by his own oath. 

7. We conclude, therefore, that these laws, on the 
whole, are no better than none. We should not 
anticipate, from their operation, any better provision 
for the clothing and sustenance of slaves, in these 
four States, than in the other slave States, where no 
laws exist. AYe are not aware that there is any per- 
ceptible difference in fact. And we may extend the 
remark to the laws of the four States mentioned in 
the previous chapter, on the subject of slave labor. 
The 2irinciple of slave-ownership, viz.^ human chat- 
telhood, is not iynjMired or infringed hy them. The 
master has the poxcer in his own hands. He may do 
ivhat he wills with his oivn. Such, at every point, is 
"the legal relation of master and slave." 

From the law, we now turn to the prevailing 
practice. From the former we may anticipate the 
latter. In the work to which we have so often 
referred (Weld's " Slavery as it is") may be found 
a great amount of authentic testimony of highly 
respectable witnesses, of former and later times, for 



FOOD — CLOTHING SHELTER. 141 

"whicli we cannot spare room, but the substance is 
as follows : 

Hunger.— Slaves in Virginia (1820) are "ill fed." 
They are " doomed to scarcit}^ and hunger." (Alex. 
Smythe, M. C.) In 1739, they "had not sufl&cient 
food to eat ; they were scarcel}- permitted to pick up 
the crumbs that fell from their masters' tables." 
(Rev. Geo. "Whitefield.) — They are "deprived of need- 
ful subsistence." (Rev. Geo. Bourne.) — In 1791 "they 
were supplied with barely enough to keep them from 
starving." (Dr. Joj^athan Edwards, of Connecticut.) — ■ 
In Georgia " their allowance is often not adequate to 
the support of a laboring man." (Thomas Clay, Esq., 
a slaveholder.) — In Tennessee "thousands are pressed 
with the gnawings of hunger." (Rev. John Rankin.) — 
In Xorth Carolina, 1826, "the greater part of them 
go half starved, much of the time." (Moses and 
Wm. Swain.) — In Louisiana, 1835, " there is a good 
deal of suffering from hunger" — " utter famishment, 
during a great portion of the year." (A. A. Stone.) — 
In Mississippi, " half starved." (Tobias Boudinot.) 

Kinds of Food. — The general testimony is, that 
slaves are allowed meat only as an occasional "in- 
dulgence or favor" — "at Christmas," &c. &c. Expe- 
riments have been made with cotton seed, as a sub- 
stitute in part for corn. Gen. Wade Ilampton is said 
to have tried the experiment, till, as he himself de- 
clared with an oath, his slaves "died like rotten 
sheep." This statement was furnished by "a lady 
of high respectability and great moral worth," to "a 
clergyman in the West, extensively known both as 



142 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

a preacher and a writer. His name is -with tlie 
Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery 
Society." (Weld's " American Slavery as it is," p. 29.) 

Quantity. — "The quantity allowed by custom 
is a peck of corn a week." (Thos. Clay, Esq., Geor- 
gia, 1833.) Same testimony by W. C. Gildersleeve, 
now of Wilkesbarre, Pa. ; and Eev. Horace Moulton, 
of Marlboro, Mass. — both once resident in Georgia. 

Maryland: Same quantity, 1788. (Baltimore J.cZi-e7-- 
tiser.) — Florida : A quart of corn a day, to a full task 
hand, with a modicum of salt. Kind masters allowed 
a peck of corn a week. Some masters allowed no 
salt." (Wm. Ladd, once a Florida slaveholder, since 
of Minot, Me.) — North Carolina: Seven quarts of 
meal, or eight quarts of small rice, for one week.' 
(Nehemiah Caulkins, Waterford, Ct. ; resident in 
North Carolina eleven winters.) — Virginia: A pint 
of corn meal and a salt herring is the allowance, (for 
one meal,) or, in lieu of the herring, a 'dab' of fat 
meat of about the same value. I have hnoivn the 
sour milk and clauber to be served out to the hands, 
when there was an abundance of milk on the plan- 
tation. This is a luxur}', not often afforded." (Rev. 
C. S. Renshaw, a native Virginian.) 

John "Woolman, in his Journal, (1757,) makes the 
general statement, that "they have in common little 
else allowed but one pech of Indian corn and some 
salt, for one week, with o, feic potatoes; the potatoes 
they commonly raise by their labor on the first day 
of the lueeky (Life of Woolman, p. 71.) 

Quality of Food. — " There is often a defect here." 



FOOD — CLOTHIXG — SHELTER. 143 

(Thos. Clay, Esq., Georgia.) — "The feed of slaves is 
generally of the poorest kind," (Rev. Horace Moiil- 
tou.) — In Kentucky, "They live on a coarse, crude, 
unwholesome diet." {Weslern Medical Eeformer.) — 
"Large numbers of badly fed negroes were swept off 
by a prevailing epidemic." — "The best remedy for 
that horrid malady, ' Cachexia Africana^ is to feed 
the negroes with nutritious food." (Prof. A. G. Smith, 
of New- York Medical College, once physician in 
Louisville, Ky.) 

Number and times of meals, each day. — "The 
slaves eat twice during the day." (Dr. Jonathan Ed- 
wards, Connecticut, 1791.) 

Florida: " The slaves go to the field in the morn- 
ing; they carry with them meal, wet with water, 
and at noon build a fire on the ground, and bake it 
in the ashes. After the labors of the day are over, 
they take their second meal of ashcake. (Philemon 
Bliss, Esq., Elyria, Ohio; resident in Florida, 1834-5.) 

Mississippi, 1837 : " The slaves received two meals 
during the da}'. Breakfast about 11 o'clock; the 
other meal after night." (Eleazer Powell, now of Chip- 
pewa, Pa.) 

North Carolina : "The breakfast of the slaves was 
generally about 10 or 11 o'clock A. M." (Nehemiah 
Caulkins.) 

Virginia: " Two meals a day. Breakfast from 10 
to 11 o'clock A. M. Supper from 6 to 9 or 10 at 
night, as the season and crops may be." (Rev. C. S. 
Renshaw.) — "Meals generally taken without knife, 
dish, or spoon." (Wm. Leftwitch, a Virginian.) 



144 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Georgia: "The corn is ground in a hand mill, by 
the slave, after his task is done. Generally there is 
but one mill on a plantation, and as but one can 
grind at a time, the mill is going sometimes very late 
at night." (^Y. C. Gildersleeve, Esq., a native Geor- 
gian.) Similar testimony from other States. 

South Carolina: "Only two meals a da}' are 
allowed to the house slaves; ihejirst at 12 o'clock. K 
they eat before this time it is by stealth, and I am 
sure there must be a good deal of suffering among 
them from hunger^ particularly by children. Besides 
this, they are often kept from their meals by way of 
punishment. No table is provided for them to eat 
from. They know nothing of the comfort and plea- 
sure of gathering round the social board ; each takes 
his plate or tin pan, and holds it in the hand or on 
the lap. I never saw slaves seated round a ta.hle^ to 
partake of an}'- meal." (Angelina Grimke "Weld.) 

" Stealing food is a crime, punished by flogging. A 
woman was punished for stealing four potatoes." 
(P. Bliss, Esq.) 

"Cooks, waiters, chambermaids, &c., generally get 
some meat every day — the remaining bits and bones 
of their masters' tables." (Weld, p. 81.) 

The law of Louisiana of 1806, (ChajD. X.,) pre- 
scribing the time allotted to meals, by its mention of 
brcakfiist and dinner, seems to indicate a third meal, 
though it is not directly mentioned. 

The fare of slaves is doubtless better in the slave- 
growing than in the olViyQ-consuming States. And 



FOOD — CLOTHING SHELTER. 145 

there are exceptions to tlie general picture we have 
presented. 

Clothixg. — Mr. Weld has shown by abundant 
and unimpeacliable testimony, that "■ the clothing of 
slaves by day, and their covering by night, is not 
adequate either for comfort or decency." (p. 40, 
&c.) 

Virginia: Hon. T. T. Bouldin, a slaveholder, in a 
speech in Congress, Feb. 16, 1835, said: "He knew 
that many negroes had died from exposure to 
weather," and added, "They are clad in a flimsy 
fabric that will turn neither wind nor water." 

Maryland: "The slaves, naked and starved, often 
fall victims to the inclemencies of the weather." 
(Geo. Buchanan, M.D., of Baltimore, 1791.) 

Georgia, &c. : "We rode through many rice 
swamps, where the blacks were very numerous" — 
" working up to the middle in water, men and women 
nearly nakedJ'' (Wm. Saverj'-, of Philadelphia, Minis- 
ter Friends' Soc, 1791.) 

Tennessee, &c. : "In every slaveholding State many 
slaves suffer extremely, both while they labor and 
when they sleep, for loant of clothing to keep them 
warm." (Rev. John Rankin.) 

The South generally: "Men and women have 
many times scarce clothes enough to hide their naked- 
ness, and boys and girls, ten and twelve years old, 
are often (/u^Ve naked among their masters' chilcben." 
(John Woolman, 1757. Journal, &c., p. 150.) 

"Both male and female go without chtking at the 
age of 8 or 10 years." (John Parrish, Minister Soc. 



146 THE AMERICA^'■ SLAVE CODE, 

Friends, 1804.) Same testimony from many others 
more recently. 

Alabama, 1819: "Hardly a rag of clothing on 
them."' — "Generally the only bedding -was a blan- 
ket." (S. E. Maltby.) 

Virginia : " Two old blankets." (Wm. Leftwich.) 
Advertisements of fugitives every year often describe 
them as "ragged" or "nearly naked." 

Florida: "They were allowed two suits of clothes 
a year; viz: one pair of trowsers with a shirt or 
frock of osnaburgh, for summer ; and for winter, one 
pair of trowsers and a jacket of negro-cloth, with a 
baize shirt and a pair of shoes. Some allowed hats, 
and some did not ; and they were generally, I believe, 
allowed one blanket in two years. Garments of 
similar materials were allowed the women." ("Wm. 
Ladd, late of Minot, Me.) 

"The slaves are generally without beds or bed- 
steads." — "I have seen men and women at work in 
the fields, more than half naked." (Testimon}' fur- 
nished by Rev. C. S. Renshaw, from his friend.) 

"In Lower Tennessee, Mississippi and Louisiana, 
clothing made of cotton bagging" — "no shoes." 
(G. W. Westgate.) 

"Will" of the celebrated Johx Randolph of 
Roanoke, Va., distinguished as a "kind master": 
"To my old and faithful servants Essex and his 
wife Hetty, I give and bequeath a pair of strong 
shoes, a suit of clothes, and a blanket each, to be 
paid them annually; also an annual hat to Essex." 
No socks, stockings, bonnets, cloaks, handkerchiefs, 



FOOD — CLOTHING — .SIIELTEE. 147 

or towels — no change cither of outside or inner gar- 
ments! And a solemn "Last Will and Testament" 
was deemed necessary to secure to tliem even the 
articles specified ! 

Family servants, waiters, &c., and hotel attendants, 
must needs appear decentl}^ clad. And kept mis- 
tresses of gentlemen are often arrayed extravagantly. 
Superficial observers and shallow thinkers, seeing 
this, rejDort the happy condition of slaves in general, 
having never seen the "negi'o quarters" on the plan- 
tations. 

Dwellings. — These "generally contain but one 
apartment, and that without a floor;" — "no parti- 
tion to separate the sexes;" — nothing that a Northern 
laborer "would call a bed"; — sometimes "built by 
themselves of stakes and poles, and thatched with 
palmetto leaf; sometimes of clay;" — " no window glass 
or sashes;" — "not sufficient to keep off the inclem- 
ency of the weather ; — sometimes built of logs ; on 
old ^plantations sometimes of frame and clapboards, 
size, 8 feet by 10, or 10 by 12, and but 8 feet high ;"— 
"without any chimney — a hole at top to let the 
smoke out ;" — ^'■generally put up (in Georgia) without a 
nail;'''' — "ill ventilated;" — "surrounded with filth ;" — 
"with neither chairs, table, nor bedstead;" — "on the 
cold ground they must lie without covering, and 
shiver while they slumber." Such is the picture 
attested by competent witnesses. (Weld's "Slavery 
as it is," p. 43, &c.) 

Treatment of the sick, the infirm, and the 
AGED. — On this topic we have not room here to enter. 



148 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

In Mr, "Weld's work, pp. 4-i, 45, may be found state- 
ments from the late llev. Dr. Cbanning, of Boston, 
once resident in Virginia, (extracted from his work 
on Slavery ;) from Miss Sarah M. Grimke, formerly 
of Charleston, S. C. ; from Geo. A. Avery, merchant, 
Eochester, N. Y., once living in Virginia; from Rev. 
Wm. T. Allan, once of Alabama ; the late Rev. Elias 
Cornelius, (p. 161 ;)'■' and several others, all showing 
that great barbarity characterizes the slaveholders, 
generally, in their ill treatment or neglect of these 
unfortunate beings, held dependent upon them, and 
defenceless, as slaves. 

Into all the particulars which go to make up the 
dreadful condition of the slave, the plan and limits 
of the present treatise do not permit us to go. We 
select mainly such facts as illustrate the slave laics, 
and the consequent "legal relation" of master and 
slave. At every step we find it a relation identified 
with wretchedness and wrong. 

From WJieeler's "Law of Slavery" it would seem 
that slaveholders are in the habit of refusing to pay 
physicians for medical attendance on their slaves, 
and that suits at law are the consequence, which are 
variously decided, the decisions of a lower court 
being sometimes reversed by a higher. The follow- 
ing points are put down by Mr. Wheeler in his 
marginal titles : 

Dunbar vs. Williams. 10 John's New- York Rep. 
249: "No action lies by a physician against the 

* Sec Edwards' Life of Rev. Elias Cornelius, pp. 101-3. 



FOOD — CLOTHING SHELTER. 149 

master for attendance upon liis slave without his 
knowledge, unless it be a case of extreme necessity." 
(Wheeler, p. 225.) 

Wells vs. Kennerly, 4 McCord's S. C. Rep. 123 : 
"The owner is not liable for medical attendance upon 
a hired slave, given at the request of the /uVer." 
(lb., p. 226.) 

It is hardly to be expected that the temporary 
hi^-er of a slave would be forward to incur the ex- 
pense of much medical attendance. 

In the case of Johnson et al. vs. Barrett, Judge 
Johnson, South Carolina, said: " If a slave be in 
^eril in the absence of his master, the interest of the 
owner is most effectually subserved by rendering 
assistance to the slave, and in good conscience the 
owner is bound to make satisfaction." (lb.) 

The legal rule then is, to give medical aid when 
the interest of the owner demands it I 



CHAPTER Xn. 

COERCED LABOR, WITHOUT WAGES. 

The " legal relation of Master and Slave" — being the relation of an Owner to a 
Chattel, is a relation incompatible with the natural and heaven-sanctioned 
" relation" of Labor and Wages. 

Christianity is "a swift witness against those 
that oppress" even "the hireling in his wages." It 
also proclaims: ""Woe unto him that useth his neigh- 
bor's service without wages, and giveth him not for 
his work." 

To " oj)press the hireling IN his wages," is to pay 
him inadequate wages, or to withhold a part of his 
earnings. To use a neighbor's service without 
"vvages, is to jDay him no wages at all. This latter is 
the definition of slave labor, and that labor is extorted 
by brute force. The slave is not a " hireling." He 
is not hired at all, any more than a working horse 
or ox is hired. In saying this, we only state the legal 
and the inevitable fact of the case. More particularly : 

1. "Wages is "that which is stipulated to be paid 
for services." There is, in this, of necessity, the con- 
current action of two parties who stipulate, namely : 
the employer and the emjjloyed ; the pa3-er and liim 



SERVICE "WITHOUT WAGES. 151 

that receives pay. The wages are determined by a 
mutual stipulation, agreement, or contract between 
the parties, 

2. Wages, to be legitimate, must be equitable, or 
equal. There must be, by both the parties, an 
equivalent given and received. The labor must be 
equal in value to the wages, and the wages must be 
equal in value to the labor. 

3. Wages is that which, when received by the 
laborer, becomes his own, his j^'i'operiy. The very 
ideas of irroperty and of the rights of property have 
their origin here. He who receives wages, possesses, 
appropriates, and disposes of his wages ; and no one, 
without an equivalent, or without his leave, can take 
them from him. 

4. Wages for the faithful services of an able-bodied 
man, during the proper working hours of the day, 
in order to be adequate and equitable wages, must 
more than suffice for his comfortable sustenance as a 
mere animal. They must enable him to support a 
fa mil}', to suj)ply his own and their social wants as 
intellectual and moral beings, to discharge his re- 
sponsibilities as a member of society, and lay up a 
surplus for the ordinary exigences of the future. 

5. The wages of the successful producer of the 
-fruits of the earth, to be equitable, must secure to 

him, as his possession, a large proportion of those 
fruits. On a plantation, or in a parish, township, or 
province, in which the men whose labor has built 
comfortable houses may not live in comfortable 
houses ; whose labor has procured ample supplies of 



152 THE AMERICAIJJ- SLAVE CODE. 

food, clothing, and family comforts, but may not 
share in and enjoy those supplies and comforts, 
(unless squandered by improvidence,) there could not 
have been an equitable receipt of wages, by the 
laborer. 

By each and all of these definitions and tests of 
wages, the slave system, the slaveholding "relation," 
both in theory and practice, stand condemned. They 
do not and they cannot accord wages to the 

LABORER. 

For, in the first place, "the slave can make no 
contract," and hence he cannot stipulate for wages. 

2. " The slave can possess nothing," and hence he 
cannot receive (because he cannot possess, appropri- 
ate, or use) wages. 

8. The slave is "goods and chattels," and these 
cannot earn wages. The sustenance of the horse and 
ox are not wages. The needful repairs of a machine 
are not wages. "\Yere all the slaves as "fat and 
sleek" as Henry Clay's, their comfortable fare would 
not be wages. Besides : 

4. The cost of sustenance for the slave (were it 
matter of mutual stipulation) is too trivial to be dig- 
nified with the name of icagesf Look over the pre- 
ceding chapters. Estimate the labor. Look at its 
products — ^houses, equipages, wardrobes, Avines, feasts, 
exports, returns, revenues, banks, cities, navies ! 
Imagine an exodus of the slaves, like that of the 
Ilebrews out of Egypt, and let the wand of their 
Moses sweep along with them all the products of 
their labor ! What would be left after them ? Then 



SERVICE WITHOUT WAGES. 153 

inquire after tlie compensation that has been paid for 
this habor. "A peck of corn a week, with a modicum 
of salt." Say 12| bushels of corn a year, at 50 cents, 
is $6.25 — the salt, 25 cents, makes $6.50 for a year's 
board. Then add the wardrobe of John Eandolph's 
"faithful servant Essex" — possibly $10 more. The 
house-rent, at what the "owner" thinks it worth! 
Then foot up the sum total — or, take the estimate of 
slaveholders themselves, in Eeports of Committees 
of Agi-icultural Societies, published to the world, 
viz., $15 to $20 per annum, along with the confes- 
sion of Thomas Clay, Esq., of Georgia : " The present 
economy of the slave system is, to get all you can 
from the slave, and give him AS little as will sup- 
port him in a icorlchig condition." It is no counter- 
proof or palliation, that the system is unprofitable. 
To "use a neighbor's service without wages" has 
always been profitless, because always wrong, and 
heaven-abhorred. 

The balance between the slave's earmn^/s (possessed 
or squandered by his "owner,") and the cost of the 
slave's support, may tell us whether the slave could 
"take care of himself" if suffered to receive honest 
wages. 

Again, we say, look at the wealth earned by the 
slave; then look at the slave, half famished, half 
naked, without a bed, shivering, sleeping on the bare 
ground with an old blanket around him, or turned 
off, perhaps, in decrepid old age, by his " owner," 
" a gentleman [reputedly] of great benevolence and 
generosity of character," to beg in the streets of 



154: THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

Charleston, (S. C.,) because " too old to work, and 
therefore his allowance was stopped f^''^ then learn how 
"the innocent legal relation" enforces labor with- 
out WAGES. 

When we say it is " the legal relation" that does 
this, we have the testimony of Southern judicial de- 
cision to sustain us. 

In the case of the State vs. Mann, before cited, 
Judge Rufiin said : 

The slave is " doomed, in his own person and his 
posterit}^, to live Avithout knowledge, and without 
capacity to make any thing his oivn, and to toil that others 
may reap the fruits J^ (Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 
246, copied from 2 Devcreaux's North CaroUna 
Eep., 263.) 

* See Weld's " Slavery as it is," p. 54. Testimony of the daugh- 
ter of Judge Grimke, of Charleston, (S. C.) 



CHAPTER XIII. 

PUNISHMENTS OF SLAVES BY THE OWNER AND HIRER. 

Being the absolute property of the Owner, the Slave is wholly in his power, 
without any effectual restraint. 

We have seen that "the legal relation" of slave 
ownership, being the relation of an owner to his 
property, invests him "with unlimited foioer. We 
have traced the exercise of that power in a number 
of directions, and have witnessed at every step, thus 
far, the express sanction or the silent acquiescence 
of the slave laws. Or, if limitations to his power 
have, at some points, and in some of the States, ap- 
peared to be interposed, it has been found, on a close 
scrutiny, to be only an appearance, and not a reality. 
In the vitally important matters of absolute purchase, 
sale, seizure for debt, inheritance, distribution, mar- 
riage, (or rather, no marriage,) annihilation of family 
sanctities, incapacity to possess property, to make a 
contract, or to receive wages in the appointment of 
labor, supply of food, clothing, and habitations, we 
have seen the power of the master every thing, the 
rights, the protection, the defense, the redress, and 
the power of the slave, nothing ! We come now to 



156 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

inquire "whetlier, in the item of slave punishmenis by 
the master, there are any available limitations or re- 
strictions of his power. In other words, whether, in 
"the legal relation" of slave owner and slave, the 
" owner" be, in reality, at this vital point, amenable 
to law ; or whether here, as at all the preceding- 
points, he rises above law, making it the instrument 
of his will, but not subjecting himself to its authority. 
If there be any such limitation, it must be, thus far, 
an inroad upon tJie principle of human chattelhood, 
denying its claims, and thwarting the exercise of the 
"rights of property" involved in it. The rights of 
property in brute animals might be limited at this 
point, without danger to the tenure of such property. 
The brute could take no advantage of such lenity, to 
throw off the yoke of dominion and outgrow its 
chattelhood. Not so with chattels endued with 
thought and reason. To be held and used as chat- 
tels at all, they must be taught (as before quoted 
from Prince's Digest, 450) that "the life of the slave 
must be in his master's keeping," or, as Judge Euthn 
expressed it, "the slave must be sensible that there 
is no appeal from his master." The old Eomans un- 
derstood this necessit}', when they engrafted the same 
maxims into their civil code : the slaves " are not 
capable of being injured" — they may be " punished 
at the discretion of their lord, or even put to death 
by his authority." The people of the South, their 
courts, and their jurists, understand this, when they 
" generally refer" (as Stroud says they do) to the 
Eoman civil code, "as containing the true principles 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTERS. 157 

of tlieir institution," " except where modified by 
statutes, or by usages Avliich have acquired the force 
of law." Those statutes and usages (on this point) 
we are now to inquire after. If it be found that 
Judge Eufan, and that Mr. Prince, in his Digest, 
have rightly represented them, the apologists of the 
" innocent legal relation" mu.st not too severely or 
too exclusively arraign their barbarism for expound- 
ing (not enacting) the law of the " relation." 

It could hardly be supposed that, in any civilized 
country, the Legislature would, by express statute, 
authorize the master to commit cruel outrages upon 
the persons of his slaves, or murder them ; nor that, 
in the present age of the world, a civil government 
would openly proclaim impunity to any persons 
beforehand, in the commission of such crimes. If it 
were desired and intended by the Legislature to pro- 
duce such a result, the more feasible and effectual 
means of doing this (especially in an elective govern- 
ment) would be to make a show of prohibiting and 
punishing the crimes, but under circumstances and 
arrangements so contrived as to render the execution 
of the law or the conviction of the offenders im- 
practicable. 

Laws and courts of justice are chiefly needed for 
the protection of the weak and the defenseless. That 
class in any community that, from these causes, is 
most exposed to violence and outrage, is the class in 
respect to which the Legislature, if it intends to protect 
them at all, will most solicitously seek methods of 
doing it effectually. If an7j distinctions are made 



158 THE AMEEICAX SLAVE CODE. 

between the subjects of the government, it will be 
made in their favor. Whenever an opposite policy is 
witnessed, especially when this is carried so far that 
the exposed class are not allowed to bring a complaint 
against one of the class to whose aggressions they are 
most exposed, or even to bear testimony against them, 
we may be certain that no protection of them was 
intended ; but that, on the other hand, the powerful 
party was intended to be countenanced in their in- 
jurious aggressions. And this would be doubly 
confirmed, if none but the same powerful party ad- 
ministered the law, or had any share in the govern- 
ment, or participation in the inmiunities or privileges 
enjoyed under it. Let such be the case between 
Catholics and Protestants, Normans and Anglo- 
Saxons, or Turks and Grreeks, and no reader of 
history would hesitate in making such a decision. 
This is the precise fact in respect to American slave- 
holders and slaves. No principle in the slave code 
is more firmly estabhshed than this: that a slave 
can bring no suit against his master, unless it be a 
suit for his freedom. Even the minor female slave 
who is to be free at the age of twenty-one can have 
no suit brought by a free parent for her relief from 
ill treatment. Such was the decision (before alluded 
to) of Judge Martin, in the case of Dorothee vs. 
Coquillon et al., Jan. Term, 1829. (19 Martin's 
Louisiana Eeports, 350. Wheeler's Law of Slavery, 
p. 198.) 

It must be idle to pretend that any statutes for the 



PUNISHMENT BY JIASTERS. 159 

protection of the slave can be of any avail m tlie 
presence of such rules, and the following : 

"//; is cm injlexihle and universal rule of slave lavj^ 
founded in one or two States upon usage, in others 
sanctioned by express legislation, THAT THE TESTI- 
MONY OF A COLORED PERSON, WHETHER BOND OR 
FREE, CANNOT BE RECEIVED AGAINST A WHITE PER- 
SON." (Stroud's Sketch, p. 27.) 

To this feature of slave law we have alluded be- 
fore, and shall devote to its details a distinct chapter, 
when we come to treat of the civil relations of the 
slaves. In the mean time, it is a feature of sufficient 
notoriety to be assumed in this chapter, having been, 
at one time, enacted in the free State of Ohio, and 
also incorporated into the ecclesiastical polity of the 
Methodist Episcopal Church, as administered in those 
States where it obtains as civil law. 

In the presence of such a regulation, very clearly, 
there can be no adequate protection of the slave 
under any laws framed for his benefit, however well 
constructed in other respects. Nevertheless, we will 
examine them, and notice their spirit, and the kind 
and degree of protection they appear to contemplate. 

South Carolina. — Act of 1740: "In case any 
person shall wilfully cut out the tongue, put out the 
eye, castrate, or cruelly scald, burn, or deprive any 
slave of any limb or member, or shall inflict any 
other cruel punishment, other than by whipping, 
or beating with a horsewhip, cowskin, switch, or 
small stick, or by putting irons on, or confining or 



160 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

imprisoning such slave, every such person shall, for 
every such offense, forfeit the sum of one hundred 
pounds, current money." (2 Brevard's Digest, 2-il.) 

This law, it is believed, is still on the statute book. 
We have said, it could hardly be supposed that any 
legislature, in a civilized country, would, by express 
statute, authorize the master to commit cruel out- 
rages upon the persons of his slaves. But this is 
done in the statute just quoted. The expression 
^^ other ihan,^^ in its connection, does expressly author- 
ize ^^ cruel punishment." And it authorizes "cruel 
punishment" in a number of forms specified, viz : 
"by whipping or beating with a horsewhip, cowskin, 
switch, or small stick, or by putting irons on, or con- 
fining or imprisoning." "Cruel punishment," if in- 
flicted in either of these ways, is expressly excepted 
from the "cruel punishments" forbidden. And on 
inspection it will be found, that the methods of 
"cruel punishment" forbidden are such, and such 
only, as diminish the pecuniary value of the slave. 
The "legal relation" which contemplates the slave 
only as a chattel, was evidently the presiding genius 
of this enactment. 

The specific prohibitions assure us that certain 
"persons" (whether owners, overseers, or others) had 
committed outrages of that character, or such particu- 
lar specifications would not have been thought of 
Such wanton destruction of "property" was not to 
be suffered. The heavy pecuniary fine would aftbrd 
some security to slave " owners" against passionate 
"overseers" and others. The defenselessness of the 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTERS. 161 

slave, and the brutality of those around him, are 
frightfully depicted in this statute, the like of which 
was never needed for the security of domestic beasts. 
Yet no compensation or damages are awarded to the 
sufferers. The "owner" might be the aggressor, but 
the slave was not allowed "to go free for his eye's 
sake," like the Hebrew servant, whose master had 
thus injured him. (Exodus xxi. 26, 27.) The 
"cruelty" authorized is a sufficient* proof that the 
Legislature had little or no regard to the suffering 
or pain endured by the slave, provided the article 
of "property" were not essentially damarjed. 

Louisiana. — "The slave is entirely subject to the 
will of his master, icho may correct and chastise him, 
though not with unusual rigor, nor so as to maim or 
mutilate him, or to expose him to the danger of loss 
of life, or so as to cause his death." (Civil Code of 
Louisiana, Art. 173.) 

Here, again, the protection of slave ^roper^_y, rather 
than the prevention of suffering by the slave, appears 
to be the leading object in view. The slave may not 
be maimed, he may not be mutilated, he may not be 
killed. Beyond this, there is nothing in the way of 
prohibition that is tangible or definite. Permission 
to the master is far more distinct and prominent. 
The " master may chastise," and he may chastise 
" with rigor, ^'' (severity ; Avithout abatement, relaxa- 
tion or mitigation. Yide Webster,) but " not with 
unusual rigor." There is something in this singular 
phraseology that requires study. Such a law, instead 
of correcting prevailing usages, receives its definition 



162 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

from them. That wliicli is ^^ nstiaV^ is authorized, 
whatever it may be, short of maiming mutilation, 
and murder. And the more rigorous, severe, and 
cruel may be the prevailing usages of a community, 
the more rigorous, severe, and cruel they are ex- 
pressly authorized to be. The individual is referred, 
as a standard of lawful action, to the common prac- 
tices of his neighbors around him. What is " usual " 
among thon is lawful for him. If it is '"'■usuaV^ to 
'* chastise" a slave by inflicting on him a hundred 
lashes, it is laicful to do so. K it is "usuaV^ to 
add five hundred lashes more, it is equally lawful! 
In short, the current usages of the fraternity of 
slaveholders (with the exceptions specified) are pro- 
claimed, by the Civil Code of Louisiana, to con- 
stitute the law. This approximates closely to the 
abrogation of law, so far as slaveholders are con- 
cerned, or the abdication of supremacj- by the civil 
government in their favor. The condition of this 
great nation of twenty millions of people, controlled 
by a little more than one hundred thousand slave- 
holders, seem but an expansion of this idea. 

" ?7/iz^swa7 rigor " must be defined in the light of 
what is usual And we may learn something of what 
was then considered usual rigor in Louisiana, by the 
fact that the provisions of the law of South Carolina, 
before cited, ivith exception of its prohihiiion of mutila- 
tion, had been substantially in force there, up to the 
time this new Civil Code was adopted. We may 
infer, therefore, that "cruel punishment" by "whip- 
ping or beating with a horsewhip, cowskin, switch, 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTERS. 163 

or small stick, or by putting irons on, or confining 
or imprisoning," was not "unusual," and consequent- 
ly not forbidden, by the new Civil Code. 

In 1819, the Legislature of Louisiana recognized 
the lawfulness of putting iron chains and collars 
upon slaves, to prevent them from running away, as 
follows : 

" If any person or persons, &c., shall cut or break 
any iron collar which any master of slaves shall 
have used in order to prevent the running away or 
escape of any such slave or slaves, such persons so 
offending shall, on conviction, be fined not less than 
two hundred dollars, nor exceeding one thousand 
dollars ; and suffer imprisonment for a term not ex- 
ceeding two years, nor less than six months." (Act 
of Assembly of March 6, 1819. Pamphlet, p. 61.) 

Compare this penalty mth that imposed by the 
Legislature of the same State for cruelties committed 
on slaves, viz : " not more than five hundred dollars 
nor less than two hundred," (1 Martin's Digest, 651,) 
and it will appear that the releasing of a slave from 
the "usual" punishment of the "iron chain or collar " 
is regarded a more aggravated crime than inflicting 
upon him the "unusual punishment," whatever it 
may be, prohibited by law ! For the act of mercy, 
the offender may be fined $1000 and imprisoned two 
years ; for the act of atrocious cruelty, he may be 
fined $500, but without imprisonment. Thus it is 
that the Legislature of Louisiana discountenances 
cruelty. 

Mississippi. — The Constitution empowers the Le- 



164 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

gislature to make laws to oblige tlie owners of slaves 
to treat them with humanity — to abstain from all 
injuries to them extending to life and limh^ and in 
case of their refusal or neglect to comply with the 
directions of such laws, to have such slave or slaves 
sold, for the benefit of the owner or owners. (Const. 
Mississippi, title slaves, Sect. 1. Kev. Code, 554.) 

The Legislature, so far as appears, have taken no 
action under the powers granted in this last clause 
for the sale of maltreated slaves.* Under the former 
clause the action of the Legislature is as follows : 

" Xo cruel or unusual punishment shall be inflicted 
on any slave in this State. And any master or 
other person entitled to the service of any slave, who 
shall inflict such cruel or unusual punishment, or 
shall authorize or permit the same to be inflicted, 
shall, on conviction, &;c., be fined according to the 
mao-nitude of the offense, at the discretion of the 



* Xo such provision appears to exist in any of the States, except, 
perhaps, in Louisiana ; and this constitutes another harsh feature 
of modern American slavery, as contrasted with the ancient 
Nothing can be more manifest than that no laws against the 
cruelty of masters and overseers can be of much benefit to the slave, 
if he is still to remain in the hands of a master whose tyranny had 
already demanded legal interference, and who would, in most cases, 
be exasperated against the slave on whose beiialf the interfcreneo 
had been made. Judge Ruffin, if we rightly understand him, in the 
case of." the State v.i. Mann," adduces this as a reason why the mas- 
ter must not be indictable for a battery on his slave. It would 
only j)rompt him to "bloody vengeance, generally practised with 
impunity, by reason of its privacy." (Wheeler's Law of Slavery', 
p. 247.) 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTEKS. 165 

Court, in any sum not exceeding five hundred dol- 
lars," &c. (Rev. Code, 379 ; Act of June 18, 1822.) 

Here, again, no satisfaction or remuneration is 
awarded to the sZaye, for " a slave is not capable of 
being injured;" he is a "chattel" — a "thing" — not 
a person. And it is only an ^'•unusuaV punishment 
that IS forbidden ! The masters and overseers have 
only to repeat their excessive punishments so fre- 
quently that they become ^^Ksual,^^ and the statute 
docs not apply to them ! In this view it holds out 
an inducement to render the most cruel inflictions 
vsKcd. Besides all this, the slave can bring no suit. 
lie can enter no complaint. He can bear no testi- 
mony. No other slave or free colored person can 
bear testimony against a wh He person ; and the law 
is administered by slaveholders. It is incredible that 
owners and overseers should be much restrained by 
the provisions of this act. 

Alabama — has a statute similar to that of Missis- 
sippi, except that the fine imposed is only one hun- 
dred dollars, instead of Jiue hundred. (Toulman's 
Digest, 631.) 

Missouri. — The Constitution not only empoicers 
the Leo-islature " to oblige the owners of slaves to 
treat them with humanity, and to abstain from all 
injuries to them extending to life or ZimJ," (Art. 3, 
Sec. 26, last clause, 1 Missouri Laws, 48,) but it is also 
made its duty to pass such laws as may be necessary 
for this purpose. 

Here, as before, the "life and limb" — ^the pecuni- 
ary value of the " property " — appears the prominent 



166 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

idea. Owners of property may not wantonly destroy 
it, to the public detriment, at the risk of their fami- 
lies and creditors. Owners of this refractory species 
of property, being " nursed and daily exercised in 
tyranny," are under special temptations. " To treat 
them [the slaves] Avith humanity" is an indefinite 
expression. Kightly construed, it would restore to 
them the right of testimony — the rights of human 
beings. But this was not the design, nor is it the 
practical construction of the instrument. So far as 
is known, (or previously to 1827, the latest dates in 
our possession,) "wo law has been enacted on the 
authority of this article in the Constitution." (Vide 
Stroud's Sketch, p. 43.) 

The following, however, is found on the statute 
book: 

" If any slave resist his or her master, mistress, 
overseer, or employer, or refuse to obey his or her 
lawful commands, it shall be lawful for such master, 
&;c., to commit such slave to the common jail of the 
county, there to remain at the pleasure of the master, 
&c. ; and the sheriff shall receive such slave and keep 
him, &c., in confinement, at the expense of the per- 
son committing him or her." (1 Missouri Laws, 809.) 

^'Lawful commands^'' — But what if the commands 
are not lawful ? And who Is to decide, and by what 
testimony ? The slave can bear no testimony — can 
enter no complaint' — can set up no plea in arrest of 
proceedings. The " innocent legal relation," being 
a mere relation of owner and property, would not 
permit this. A legal process between owner and 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTERS. 167 

chattel would be an absurdity, and the statute, 
accordingly, prescribes none. The master simply 
"commits" his slave to the "sheriff," and it is the 
business of that public functionary to " receive" him. 
The insertion of the word "lawful" was a mere 
flirce. It might be the " command" of the " owner" 
to a slave wife or virgin to submit to his embraces. 
Worse punishments than imprisonment are known 
to be in use in such cases, and are believed to be 
not ^' timisual:'' This law has its counterpart or 
emendation in the municipal regulations of slave 
cities, where house servants (in the absence of any 
plantation overseer) are summarily sent to a public 
officer to be ivMpped a specified number of lashes, 
without any mention of the offense. 

So far from any limitation of the " owner's" author- 
ity and power, we here find it enlarged. The public 
arm, instead of protecting the slave against the mas 
ter, assists the master in the exercise of his irrespon- 
sible despotism over the slave. 

And in doing this the slave owner is invested with 
a dignity not conferred on any other class of citi- 
zens. He becomes ex officio^ in virtue of his being 
a slaveholder, a judicial functionary himself, with 
the powers of a court of justice to award sentence, 
and order a public officer to put it in execution — a 
court in which the prosecutor is judge, and without 
even the forms of trial, or permitting the adverse 
party a hearing, gives verdict and sentence in his 
own case ! 

This feature of the Southern Slave Code was ex- 



168 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

tended over all the United States by the decision of 
the U. S. Supreme Court, Prigg vs. Pennsylvania, 
in which it was laid down that the slave owner him- 
self has authority to arrest his alleged fugitive with- 
out a warrant from a magistrate. The same principle 
is also contained in the Fugitive Slave Bill, enacted 
by the Federal Congress in 1852. 

From the acts of the Legislatures we now turn to 
the decisions of the Courts, to learn the practical 
value of the protection provided by the statutes for 
the slave. 

The State vs. Maner, 2 Hill's S. C. Eep. 453. 

S. P. Hilton vs. Caston, 2 Bay's Eep. 98. 

White vs. Chambers, 2 Bay's Rep. 70. 

State vs. Cheatwood, Hill's Eep. -159. 

"Per Cur., O'^NeiU., J. — The criminal offense of 
assault and battery cannot, at common law, be com- 
mitted on the j^erson of a slave. For, notwithstanding 
for some purposes a slave is regarded in law as a 
person, yet generally he is a mere chattel personal, 
and his right of personal protection belongs to his 
master, who can maintain an acti"" m' trespass for 
the battery of his slave. 

^^ There can therefore be no offense against the State 
for a mere beating of a slave, unaccompanied by any 
circumstances of cruelty, or an attempt to kill and 
murder. The peace of Vie State is not thereby broken, 
for a slave is not generally regarded as legally capa- 
ble of being within the peace of the State. He is 
to not a citizen, and is not, in that character, entitled 
her protection." (Wheeler's Law of Slaver}-, p. 2-13.) 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTERS. 169 

It may be thought that this case is not in point, 
in discussing, as we here do, the liabihties of masters 
for maltreating their slaves, as this was not the case 
of a slave master. Our argument is this : K the 
Courts decide that white persons, not the owners of 
the slave thus abused, cannot be punished for assault 
and battery, it is very evident that the owners can- 
not be. 

And this is distinctly laid down in the case that 
next follows, where, although the defendant was 
only the hirer and not the oumer, the Court laid down 
the rule of law for an oivner, and then applied it to 
the hirer, Avhich (with the jDreceding) covers the 
whole ground, and shows that the slave has no legal 
remedy or protection in the Criminal Code against 
assault and battery, /ro?7z any person ivhatever ! The 
right of the master to maintain an action against the 
assailant of his slave property for pecuniary dam- 
ages, is altogether another question. 

" The master is not liable to an indictment for a lat- 
tery committed UPON his slaved (Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery, p. 244.) 

This statement is the Keporter's (or Mr. Wheeler's) 
marginal title to the case of " The State vs. Mann, 
Dec. 7, 1829. 2 Devereaux's North Carolina Eep. 
263." 

" The defendant was indicted for an assault and 
battery upon Lxjdia, the servant of one Elizabeth 
Jones. On the trial it appeared that the defendant 
had hired the slave for a year ; that during the term 
the slave had committed some small offense, . for 



170 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

which the defendant undertook to chastise her ; that 
while in the act of so doing, the slave ran off, where- 
upon the defendant called upon her to stop, which 
being refused, he shot at and wounded her. The 
Judge in the Court below charged the jury that if 
they believed the punishment inflicted by the defend- 
ant was cruel and unwarrantable, and disproportion- 
ate to the offense committed by the slave, that in law 
the defendant was guilty, as he had only a special 
'property in the slave. A verdict was returned for the 
State, and the defendant appealed. 

"Per Cur.^ Buffin, J. — A Judge cannot but lament, 
when such cases as the present are brought into judg- 
ment. It is impossible that the reasons on which 
they go can be appreciated but where institutions 
similar to our own exist, and are thoroughly under- 
stood. The struggle, too, in the Judge's own breast 
between the feelings of the man and the duty of the 
magistrate, is a severe one, presenting strong tempt- 
ation to put aside such questions, if it be possible. 
It is useless, however, to complain of things in our 
political state. And it is criminal in a Court to avoid 
any responsibility which the laws impose. With 
whatever reluctance, therefore, it is done, the Court 
is compelled to express an opinion upon the extent 
of the dominion of the master over the slave in North 
Carolina." "TAe inquiry here is, ivhether a cruel and 
unreasonable battery upon a slave, by the hirer, is indict- 
able. The Judge below instructed the jury that it 
is. He seems to have put it upon the ground that 
the defendant had but a special property. Our laws 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTERS. 171 

Tiniformly treat the master or other person having 
the possession and command of the slave, as entitled 
to the same extent of authority. The object is the 
same — the service of the slave ; and the same powers 
must be confided. In a criminal proceeding, and 
indeed in reference to all other persons but the gen- 
eral owner, the hirer and j)ossessor of the slave, in 
relation to both rights and duties, is^ for the time 
being, the owner. This opinion would, perhaps, 
dispose of this particular case, because the indict- 
ment which charges a battery upon the slave of 
Elizabeth Jones is not supported by proof of a bat- 
tery ujDon defendant's own slave ; since different jus- 
tifications may be applicable to the two cases. But 
upon the general question whether the owner is an- 
swerable, crimmaltei', for a battery upon his own 
slave, or other exercise of authority or force^ not for- 
bidden by statute, the Court entertains but little 
doubt. That he is so liable has never been decided, nor, 
as far as is known, been hitherto contended. THERE 
HAS [have] BEEN NO PROSECUTIONS OF 
THE SORT.* THE ESTABLISHED AND UNI- 
FORM PRACTICE OF THE COUNTRY in this 



* This testimon}' tells us how much those statutes are worth 
that pretend to limit the amount of punishment that an owner 
may inflict on his slave. It may indeed be said that although a 
master is not indictable in general terms for an assault and battery, 
yet he may be indicted for violations of specific provisions of a 
statute. But if this be so, why was not the defendant, in this case, 
indicted for the shooting of Lydia, if there existed any statute for- 
bidding such an outrage? And if not, where is the protection'? 



172 TnE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

respect is the lest evidence of the portion of power DEEM- 
ED BY THE WHOLE COMMUNITY KEQUI- 
SITE TO THE PRESERVATION OF THE MAS- 
TER'S DOMINION. K we thought differently, we 
could not set our notions in array agamst the judg- 
ment of every body eke, and say that this or that 
authority may be safely lopped off. This has indeed 
been assimilated, at the bar, to the other domestic 
relation," &;c., &c.^'^ 

Having answered this plea by showing the co7i- 
trast between such domestic relations and those 
between master and slave, and the consequent degra- 
dation of " the subject," his Honor proceeds : 

" What iiOEAL considerations shall be addressed to 
such a being, to convince him, what it is imjyossible 
but that the most stupid must feel and know can 
never be true, that he is thus to labor upon a princi- 
ple of natural duty, or for the sake of his own per- 
sonal happiness ? Such services can only be expected 
from one who has no Avill of his own ; who surren- 
ders his will in imjDlicit obedience to that of another. 
Such obedience is the consequence only of uncon- 
trolled authority over the body. There is nothing else 
which can operate to produce the effect. TJie 2)oiver 
of the master must be absolute, to render the suhnission 
of the slave perfect. I most freely confess my sense 
of the harshness of the proposition. I feel it as 

* The answer of Judge Ruffin to this plea, we have already 
copied, in our definition of Slavery in Chapter I., and need not 
repeat it here. 



PUNISHMENT BY MASTERS, 173 

deeply as any man ,can. And, as a principle of moral 
right^ every person in liis retirement must repudiate 
it. But in the actual condition of things it must be 
so. TJiere is no remndy. This discipline belongs to the 
state of slavery. They cannot be disunited, without abro- 
gating at once the rights of the master, and absolving the 
slave from his subjection. It constitutes the curse of 
slavery to both the bond and the free portions of our 
population. BUT IT IS INHERENT IN THE 
RELATION OF MASTER AND SLAVE. That 
there may be particular instances of cruelty and 
deliberate barbarity where in conscience the law 
inight properly interfere, is most probable. 

" The difficulty is to determine where a Court may 
properly begin. Merely in the abstract, it may well 
be asked, which power of the master accords with 
RIGHT? The answer loill probably sweej) away cdl of 
them. But we cannot look at the matter in that light. 
The truth is, that we are forbidden to enter upon a 
train of general reasoning on the subject. We can- 
not alloxo tha right of the master to be brought into dis- 
cussion in the Courts of justice. The slave, to remain a 
slave, must be made sensible that there is no aj^peal from 
his master ; that his j^^^'soii is in no instance usurped, 
but is conferred by the laws of man at least, if not 
by the law of God. The danger would be great 
indeed, if the tribunals of justice should be called on 
to graduate the punishment ap])ropriatc to every 
temper and every dereliction of menial dut}'. No 
man can anticipate the many and aggravated provo- 
cations of the master, which the slave would be 



174 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

constantly stimulated, by liis own passions or the 
instigations of others, to give ; or the consequent 
wrath of the master, prompting him to bloody ven- 
geance upon the turbulent traitor ; A vengeance 

GENERALLY PRACTISED WITH IMPUNITY, BY REASON 

OF ITS PRIVACY. The Court, therefore, disclaims the 
power of CHANGING THE RELATION in which these 
parts of our people stand to each other." " I repeat 
that I would gladly have avoided this ungrateful ques- 
tion ; but being brought to it, the Court is compelled 
to declare, that while slavery exists among ils in its pre- 
sent state, or until it shall seem fit to the Legislature to 
interpose express enactments to the contrary, it will 
be the imj)erative duty of the Judges to recognize 
the fall dominion of the owner over the slave, except 
where the exercise of it is forbidden by the statute. 
And this v.'e do on the ground, that this dominion is 
essential to the value of slaves as lyropertij, to the secu- 
rity of the master, and tlie public tranquillity, greatly 
dependent upon their subordination ; and, in fine, as 
most effectually securing the general protection and 
comfort of the slaves themselves. Judgment below 
reversed, and judgment entered for the defendant." 
(Wheeler's Law of Slavery, pp. 24-J-8.") 

Ilere is a document that will repa}' profound 
study. The moral wrong of slavery is distinctly and 
repeatedly admitted, along with the most resolute 
determination to support it, hy not allouing the rights 
of the master to come under judicial investigation, be- 
traying a consciousness that they woidd not abide 
the test of the first principles of legal science. The 



PUNISHIIENT BY MASTERS. 175 

struggle between the man and the magistrate^ imply- 
ing that slavery requires of its magistrates to trample 
upon their pwn manhood ; the cool and deliberate 
decision to do this, and to elevate the law of slavery 
above the law of nature and of nature's God, are 
painful but instructive features of the exhibition. 
And so is the incidental testimony to the frequency 
of bloody outrages, " generally practised with impu- 
nity, by reason of their privacy." 

But, in this cliapter, we are chiefly concerned with 
this judicial decision that " a cruel and unreasonable 
battery on a slave by a hirer is not indictable," be- 
cause such battery by an owner would not be ; the 
testimony that the opposite doctrine has never 
been held by the Courts; "that he [the master] is 
so liable has never been decided, nor, so far as known, 
contended for ;" that " there has been no prosecutions 
of the sort f' that "the established habits and uni- 
form practice of the country" prove that the whole 
communit}'- deem this power of the master " requi- 
site to the preservation of his dominion," and that 
this must be so, while the slave system continues. 
The arguments of Judge Euffin in proof of this, we 
deem impregnable. And it deserves notice that this 
decision, made in 1829, before there was any excite- 
ment raised on the slave question, was virtually 
endorsed in the midst of the anti-slavery agitation, in 
1837, by Judge Hitchcock of Alabama, (through his 
recommendation of the volume for the use of the 
"Southern bar,") as containing the true Southern 
doctrine. 



176 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

All this should be borne in mind, in the discussions 
of the next chapter. In order to understand, cor- 
rectly and fnlly, any one phase or fejjture of the 
slave system, it must be studied in its natural and 
necessary connection with the other features of the 
system most nearly related to it, and, indeed, with all 
its features ; for they are all mutually dependent upon 
and defined by each other. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

OF LAWS COlsrCERKING THE MURDER AND KILLING 
OF SLAVES. 

The structure of the Laws, and the condition of the Slaves, render adequate 
protection impossible. 

We come now to consider tlie laws purporting to 
restrain and punish the murderers of shaves. 

The revelations of the last chapter establish clearly 
the principle and the fact that the authority of the 
master is unlimited, and that he is not indictable, and 
never has been indicted and punished for the " cruel 
and unreasonable battery of his slave." It seems 
difficult to conceive how, in such a condition of the 
statute book, the judiciary, and the community, there 
could be any effectual restraints upon the murderers 
of slaves, or how they could be convicted and 
punished, at least where the offenders were owners 
or hirers of the slaves they had murdered. If a man 
is not protected from cruel and unreasonable battery 
at the pleasure of his assailant, how can he be pro- 
tected from the liability to be Icilled by such'battery ? 
And if the law permits the optional battery of a 
8* 



178 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

man, wliat power can it retain to punish him for the 
natural effects of such battery ? Will the law allow 
one man to beat another as much as he pleases, or 
shoot him, (as in the case last cited,) and then punish 
him because the man is thus killed? 

In former times, the murder of a slave in most, if 
not all the slaveholding regions of this country, was, 
by law, punishable by a pecuniary fine only. At 
present, the wilfal, malicious, and deliberate murder 
of a slave, hj whomsoever perpetrated, is declared to 
be punishable with death, in every State. (See 
Stroud's Sketch, p. 36.) The exclusion of all testi- 
mony of colored persons, bond or free, is a feature 
sufiicient, of itself, to render these laws nugatory. 
The " owner" or " overseer" may command the slave 
to attend him to any secret spot, and there murder 
him with impunity. Or he may do it openly, (it has 
often been done,) in the sight of many colored per- 
sons, with equal impunity. But let us examine some 
of these laws. 

South Carolina, 17^0. — The Act, in its pre- 
amble, sets forth that "cruelty is not only highly 
unbecoming those who profess themselves Christians, 
but is odious in the sight of all men who have any 
sense of virtue or humanity." [Therefore :] "To 
restrain and prevent barbarity being exercised to- 
wards slaves. Be it enacted, that if any person shall 
ivilfalUj murder his own slave, or the slaves of any 
other person, every such person [i. e., the offender] 
shall, up^n conviction thereof, forfeit and pay the 
sum of seven hundred pounds, current money, and 



MURDER OF SLAVES. 179 

shall be rendered for ever incapable of holding, ex- 
ercising, &c., any office, &c. And in case any such 
person shall not be able to pay the penalty and for- 
feiture lierebj^ inflicted and imposed, every such 
person shall be sent to any of the frontier garrisons 
of the Province, or committed to the workhouse in 
Charleston for the space of seven years, &c., &c., at 
hard labor." (2 Brevard's Digest, 241.) 

Another provision of the same Act is as follows : 
" If any person shall, on a sudden heat or passion, 
OR by iindue correction, kill His OWN slave, or the 
slave of any other person, he shall forfeit the sum 
of three hundred and fifty pounds, current money." 
(lb., 241.) 

For this latter offense there seems to have been no 
incapacity to hold office. 

The greater part of cases, especially in the absence 
of colored testimony, would come under this latter 
provision. To shoot down a slave deliberately ivould 
incur the heavier fine, and the civil disability. To 
beat out his brains with a club, or whip him to death, 
would cost £350 ; that is, if any free white person 
should witness the act, and see fit to institute pro- 
ceedings. 

This Act continu.ed in force till 1821, when the 
wilful murder of a slave was made punishable mth 
death, without benefit of clergy ; while the penalty 
for killing in " sudden heat," or "undue correction," 
was reduced to five hundred dollars, but authorizing an 
imprisonment for six months. This latter sum, there- 
fore, in South Carolina, may be considered the price 



180 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

at whicli a slave owner is licensed to kill a slave, in 
the prescribed manner, as above ; Avitli some hazard, 
perhaps, of six months' confinement— both contingent 
upon the testimony of a free WHITE person ! 

North Carolina. — Act of 1798, section 3: 
" Whereas, by Act of another Assembly, passed in 
the year 1774, the killing of a slave, however wanton, 
cruel, and deliberate, is only punishable, in the first 
instance, by imprisonment, and x^ying the value 
thereof to the OWNER, which distinction of criminality 
between the murder of a white person and one who 
is equally a human creature, but merely of a different 
complexion, is disgraceful to humanity, and de- 
grading in the highest degree to the laws and prin- 
ciples of a free. Christian, and enlightened country ; 
Be it enacted, &c., that if any person hereafter be 
guilty of maliciously killing a slave, such offender 
shall, on the first conviction thereof, be adjudged 
guilty of murder, and shall suffer the same punish- 
ment as if he had killed a free man : Provided always, 
this act shall not extend to any person killing a slave 
outlawed by virtue of any Act of Assembly of this 
State, or to any slave in the act of resistance to his 
lawful owner or master, or to any slave dying under 
MODERATE CORRECTION !" (Hay ward's Manual, 530.) 

What a contrast between the preamble and the 
details of the Act! Disgraceful to make a distinction 
between white and colored persons, yet still keeping 
up the disgraceful distinction. The "wilful and 
malicious murder" of the slave to be punished, 
"prouic^ecZ" said "wilful and malicious murder" be 



MURDER OF SLAVES, 181 

not thus and tlins committed, &c. ; implying impu- 
nity to other forms of sucli murder. 

Notice tlie exceptions provided against. 

1. "Wilful and malicious killing a slave" is to be 
punished, ''provided'^ it be not " the kilhng of a slave 
outlawed,^^ &c. 

The meaning of this appears in the fact, that a 
proclamation of outlawry against a slave is author- 
ized by statute, whenever he runs away from his 
master, conceals himself in some obscure retreat, and, 
to sustain life, "kills a liog, or some animal of the 
cattle kind." (See Hayward's Manual, 521. Act of 
1741, ch. 24, sect. 45. Stroud, p. 38.) 

2. Another exception is the case of " any slave in 
the act of resistance to his lawful owner or master." 
The Courts have determined that this proviso renders 
it lawful to kill a slave " resisting or offering to resist 
his master by force." (2 Hayward's Reports, p. 54.) 

No matter what the occasion or the necessity of 
resistance may be — whether to ward off murderous 
attacks, or (in the case of females) outrages worse 
than murder, the first motion or preparation for self- 
defense is the signal for lawful slaughter, on the 
spot, according to statute! This, in an Act ostensibly 
for the slave's protection. Bearing in mind that the 
master's account* of the matter (in the absence of 



* At Alexandria, (D. C.,) ia 1823, a slave owner chased his female 
slave, whip in hand, in open daylight, before multitudes, to the 
end of a wharf, where she jumped in and was drowned. Verdict 
of the coroner's inquest: "Death by suicide to escape deserved 
punishment." The term ''deserved" being inserted by testimony of 
the " owner," •without even a statement of the offense. 



182 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

luhite witnesses) cannot be questioned in Court, we 
have the doctrine of Judge Eufiin and of Prince's 
Digest sustained. " The slave must be taught that 
there is no appeal from his master." " His life must 
be in his master's keeping." 

3, The third exception is the case of a slave dying 
under moderate correction a ! This gives us a legis- 
lative definition of "moderate correction." It is such 
as may be apprehended or supposed to endanger and 
even take away the Hfe of the slave. In the light of 
this, we may understand also the prohibition of '^un- 
usual punishment." It does not always reach the case 
of those who die under the lash, for even this may 
be '= moderate correction," and consequently not 
" unu.sual." 

The sum of the matter is, then, this : In North 
Carolina, the " wilful and malicious killing of a slave," 
if proved by white witnesses, is to be punished by 
death, '^provided'' the said slave, being "in pursuit 
of" "liberty and happiness," does not hold his "right 
to life" more sacred than the life of "a hog, or some 
animal of the cattle kind!" Provided, also, that, in 
self-defense, she or he never offers to lift a finger to 
avert rape or murder ; and provided, finally, that he 
is not killed "under moderate correction!" 

Tennessee.— Act of October 23, 1799; similar to 
the Act of North Carolina, and with a hke proviso. 
(Laws of Tennessee.) 

The outla^\Ty of slaves is a very common occur- 
rence in the slave States. 

Georgia.— Constitution, art. 4, sect. 12: "Any 



MUEDER OF SLAVES. 183 

person who shall maliciouslj dismemher or deprive a 
slave of life^ shall suffer such punishment as would 
be inflicted in case the like offense had been com- 
mitted upon a free white person, and on like proof,* 
except in case of insurrection of said slave, and unless 

SUCH DEATH SHOULD HAPPEjST BY ACCIDENT, IX GIVING 

SUCH SLAVE MODERATE CORRECTION." (Princc's Di- 
gest, 559.) 

One question presents itself in a review of such 
enactments. What definite objects were intended to 
he reached hy them ? A decent respect for the intel- 
lects and the common sense of Southern legislators 
forbids the supposition that they could have been 
seriously intended for the protection of the slave. 
The uniform exclusion of colored witnesses is con- 
clusive of this. When, in a distinct chapter, we 
shall consider that feature of the Slave Code, this 
conclusion will, perhaps, be more deeply impressed. 
The preambles quoted from the Acts of North and 
South Carolina betray a consciousness that the sterner 
features of the Slave Code are "odious," "disgrace- 
ful," !xnd "degrading" to a "free. Christian, and en- 
lightened country." Philanthropic men at the South, 
more or less distinctly dissatisfied with the Slave Code, 
might be also appeased by some apparent relaxations. 
Attempts by some members of the Legislatures to 

* It must not be inferred that this provision restores the testi- 
mony of colored witnesses. It only reminds us that such witnesses 
cannot be summoned to attest the murder of one •white person by 
anotliei', thus weakeninf)^ the arm of civil protection in general, 
throughout the entire South. 



184 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

introduce reforms would be likely to be marred and 
rendered abortive by incongruous provisos, engrafted 
by the majority upon bills proposed by them. In 
these ways, we may readily account for the absurd 
and confused legislation recorded in this and the pre- 
ceding chajDters. 

"We turn next to the reported cases in "Wheeler's 
Law of Slavery, for any additional light on the sub- 
ject of this chapter, and of the jDreceding one. One 
division of his book, numbered XIV., on page 200, 
is headed thus : " Masters' and others' liabilities 
FOR maltreating THEIR SLAVES." If any materials 
are to be found " in all the decisions made on that 
subject [of Slavery] in the several Courts of the 
United States and State Courts," * of which Mr. 
Wheeler's work is " a compilation," which could show 
that adequate legal protection against outrage and 
murder is extended to the slave, we have certainly 
a right to look for it under this appropriate head. 
Especially might it be reasonably expected, after 
such a note by the author or compiler as the fol- 
lowing, which is ajDpended to the title of this same 
division or chapter, at the foot of page 200, viz : 

"It is stated in Stroud's Sketch of the Laws re- 
lating to Slavery, p. 35, ^that the master viay, at his 
pleasure, infiict any species of punishment upo7i the pei'- 
son of his slaved This proposition, so repugnant to 
humanit}'-, is equally opposed to the fact, and also to 
the la\v. In those States where there are no enact- 

* See title-page of Wlieeler's Law of Slavery. 



MURDER OF SLAVES. 185 

ments upon tlae subject, the common law would be 
efficient to protect the slave. Our books are full of 
criminal prosecutions for cruelty to horses and other 
animals. And the common law remedy is considered 
effective without any statutory enactment. And if 
the slave be considered an animal^ still he is under 
the protection of the law, and acts of inhumanity and 
cruelty to him is a loublic misdemeanor, and the per- 
son guilty may be indicted and punished," 
On this note of Mr. Wheeler we remark : 

1. It is undoubtedlj^ true that the common law, if 
a;pplied to the slave, would amply protect him from 
outrage and murder. It would also protect him in 
his right to his earnings and to the disposal of the 
products of his industry, to exemption from seizure 
and sale : in a word, the common law, if applied to 
the slave, would emancipate him; for every body 
knows, and the Louisiana and Kentucky Courts have 
decided, that the slave becomes free the moment he 
comes under the jurisdiction of common law, by 
being carried by consent of his master out of the 
jurisdiction of the municipal law which alone binds 
him. There is no such municipal law against " horses 
and other animals," removing them from the protec- 
tion of the common law. Mr. "Wheeler does not 
appeal to the municipal law, as existing either in 
statutes or in the judicial decisions with which he is 
so conversant, to prove that the slave enjoys effective 
protection. It is this municipal law, and not the 
common laAV, that defines the condition of the slave. 

2. Judge Stroud had explained and vindicated his 



186 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

statement by the following explanation, of wliicli 
Mr. Wheeler takes no notice: 

" From the laws which I shall now cite, it will 
fully appear that, so feu- as regards the pages of the 
statute hoolc^ the life, at least, of the slave is safe from 
the authorized violence of the master. The evil is 
not that laws are wanting, but that they cannot be 
enforced ; not that they sanction crime, but that they 
do not punish it. And this arises chiefl}^, if not 
solely, from the cause that has been more than once 
mentioned — the exclusion of the testimony, on the 
trial of a ichite person, of all who are not white." 

If the reader will examine the laws against the 
murder of slaves which we have already quoted, he 
will probably agree with us that Judge Stroud has 
conceded quite enough in their favor. 

3. On a candid review of all the slave laws we 
shall have collected in this book, with the judicial 
decisions we shall have quoted from Wheeler's Law 
of Slavery, let the reader judge what benefit the 
slave derives from the existence either of common 
law, or of statutes, or of decisions of Courts. 

4. "Our books," says Mr. Wheeler, "are full of 
criminal prosecutions for cruelty to horses and other 
animals ! " This is undoubtedly true. But this is 
not pertinent to the question at issue. ^Ir. Wheeler, 
in order to have met the statement of Judge Stroud, 
should have been able to say, " Our books abound 
in criminal prosecutions for crueltij to slaves^ But 
this he has 7iot said. 

5. And this brings us back to the observation 



MURDER OF SLAVES. 187 

before made, that if the Courts liave extended to the 
slave effective protection against outrages and mur- 
ders, esjDecially bj their owners, we have a right to 
expect the reported cases and instances^ in this division 
of Wheeler's " compilation of all the decisions," &;c., 
&c., which is headed, " Masters' and others' lia- 
bilities FOR MALTREATING THEIR SLAVES." 

Let us, then, see what this division of the work 
contains, and notice whether it "is full of criminal 
prosecutions for cruelty to" slaves, and notice, too, 
the amount of protection thus afforded to them. 

The reported cases under this head occupy less 
than five pages, and are only seven in number. Two 
only of these were ^'' criminal prosecutions'''' in the 
name of "the State." The i^emaining five are 
suits at law between one white citizen and another, 
respecting this peculiar kind of "pro-pertij. 

1. " Markham vs. Close, Sept. 1831. 2 Louisiana 
Eep., 581. — Held by the Court, Porter^ e/., that the 
infliction of cruel punishment on a slave by his 
master is a criminal offense, and must be punished 
by a criminal prosecution, and not before a civil tri- 
bunal. And after conviction, the fine is to be levied 
on the offender by the Court before whom the con- 
viction takes j)lace." (Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 
200.) 

The decision seems at variance with that of Judge 
Ruflfin before quoted, but the real object and the 
ejfects of the decision do not clearly appear. If, as 
seems implied, the defendant was the owner of the 
slave he abused, the right of the plaintiff to bring a 



188 THE AilERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

suit against liim is not apparent. And the decision 
■would seem to have dismissed the proceedings on the 
ground that there "was no foundation for a private 
litigation. "Whether any "criminal prosecution" 
was ever brought against the offender, Ave do not 
learn. Yery probably the effect of the decision was 
to quash the proceedings and hush up the matter en- 
tirely, while the marginal title reads, " Master may he 
convicted and fined for maltreating his slave." "We 
get no evidence that he was thus convicted and fined. 

2. "Allan vs. Young, Jan. T., 1821. 9 Martin's 
Louisiana Rep., 221. — IlaUheics, J. : " This is a case 
in which the plaintiff seeks to recover damages to the 
value of a slave, alleged to have been killed by the 
defendant." The decision is thus stated in the mar- 
gin : " If a slave of a bad character is pursued on 
suspicion of felony, attempt to seize a gun, flies and 
is killed in the pursuit, the Supreme Court will not 
disturb a verdict for the defendant ivho kdled him." 

Of what felon}" the slave Avas ^^ susjjccted,'^ or in 
what respects he sustained " a bad character," we are 
not informed. He may have A'cnturcd to take a 
tithe of his own earnings — he may have harbored a 
fugitive slave — he may have attempted to escape, 
himself, into freedom — ^lie may have been in the 
habit of absenting himself to visit his wife — he may 
have attempted to teach or to learn the alphabet. 
Or he may have been ^^ susj^ectcd" of some of these 
crimes ! 

3. "Jennings vs. Furderburg, Jan. T., 1827. 4 
McCord's S. C. Rep., 161.— Trespass for kilhng the 



MURDER OF SLAVES. 189 

plaintiff's slave. The defendant, with others, being 
in search of runaway negroes, surprised them in 
their camp, and fired his gun toAv^ards them as thej 
were running away, to induce them to stop. One of 
the negroes was, however, killed by a random shot. 
Decision : " The firing of the defendant in the man- 
ner stated was rash and incautious." Hence the rule, 
as in the margin : " To excuse a trespass for killing a 
slave, on the ground of accident, it must appear to 
have been done without the least fault on the part 
of the person killing." (lb., p. 201.) 

4. "Eichardson vs. Dukes, Jan. T., 1827. 4 Mc- 
Cord's S. C. Bep., 156. — Trespass for killing the 
plaintiff's slave. It appeared that the slave was 
stealing j^otatoes from a bank near the defendant's 
house. The defendant fired on him with a gun 
loaded with buck-shot, and killed him. The jury 
found a verdict for plaintiff for one dollar. Motion 
for a new trial — which was granted. The j^oint of 
law established, as stated in the margin, Avas this : 
The proper rule of damages for killing a slave^ is the 
value of the slave to the master at the time of his deaths 
(lb., p. 202.) 

5. " Westell vs. Earnest and Parker, Jan. T., 1818. 
1 Nott and McCord's S. C. Rep., 182." This was 
another suit for damages in killing a runaway slave 
by shooting him, as he ran towards a swamp. Ver- 
dict for the defendants. Motion to set it aside, 
which motion prevailed. Judge Colcock said : "If 
the slave assaults a white person, he may be killed ; 
but a slave merely flying away cannot be killed;" 



190 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

to wMcli it is added in the margin, "and if he be, 
tlie owner may recover compensation for the lossJ^ 
(Wheeler, 202-3.) 

6, " The State vs. E. Smith and E. Smith, Nov. T., 
1817. 1 Nott and McCord's S. C. Rep., 13.— The 
defendants "vv'ere convicted of killing a negro, under 
the Act of 171:0." " Sentence was pronounced by 
the Judge upon the defendants, that thej pay three 
hundred and fifty pounds, old currency." They paid 
the sum and took the Clerk's receipt. Afterwards 
the sentence was amended by fining each of the de- 
fendants £350. On an appeal, before Judge Colcock, 
the emendation was sustained. ("Wheeler, p. 203.) 

7. "The State vs. Raines, May T., 1826. 3 Mc- 
Cord's S. C. Rep., 533. — The prisoner was indicted 
for murder." " Verdict, guilty of manslaughter, and 
motion in arrest of judgment." The motion pre- 
vailed, on the ground that the charges in the indict- 
ment were not sufficiently specific. (lb., pp. 203-4.) 

Whether the defect was intentional cannot be 
known, but such arts are not uncommon when the 
guilty are to be shielded. 

The reader has now before him all the evidences 
of protection to the slave, whether by " common law" 
or otherwise, which Mr. Wheeler has presented under 
his appropriate division, headed, "Masters' and others'' 
liabilities for maltreating their slaves " — although, as 
he says, " Our books are full of prosecutions for 
cruelty to horses and other animals.^^ 

Of the seven cases adduced, not one of them ap- 
pears to have resulted in the punishment, in any 



MURDER OF SLAVES. 191 

way, of a master for maltreating his own slave. Ex- 
cept, perhaps, in the first case, where no conviction 
"was reached, it does not appear that either of the 
defendants were the owners of the slaves maltreated 
or killed. And four of the seven cases were clearly 
the prosecutions of slave owners against others for 
the destruction of their property ! 

In the division of the book headed, "Q/" the trial 
and punishment of slaves,^^ there is a case (that of 
State vs. Eeed, June Term, 1823, 2 Hawk's N. C. 
Rep., 451) which, if it had appeared in the division 
of "Masters' and others' liabilities," would have 
seemed a case in point for citation in this discussion. 
It is possible that it was placed, by mistake, under 
the wrong head, though nothing conclusive appears 
to show that the prisoner was not a slave. He was 
indicted for the murder of a slave, was found guilty, 
and a motion for arrest of judgment because of 
the insufficiency of the indictment was overruled. 
(Wheeler, p. 210.) 

Another case occurs in the division of the book 
headed, '^Liabilities of others to masters for abusing 
their slaves,''^ which seems not to have been classified 
under the appropriate head. It is not a suit of the 
owner for damages, but a criminal prosecution by the 
State for the " murder of a slave," under the Act of 
1821, viz: State vs. Cheatwood, 2 Hill's S. C. Reports. 
The defendant was convicted, and moved in arrest of 
judgment, on the ground that the indictment did not 
charge the crime in the words of the statute. The 
motion was overruled. The Report does not state 



192 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

whether the prisoner was a slave, a free colored 
man, or a white man. (Wheeler, p. 250.) 

A similar instance appears in the case of " State 
of Mississippi vs. Jones, June Term, 1820, Walker's 
Rep., 83.) "The question in this case," said Judge 
Clarke, " arising in arrest of judgment, transferred on 
doubts from Adams Superior Court, is, whether, in this 
State, murder can he committed on a slaved His Honor 
proceeded to argue that it could, and decided accord- 
ingly. The color and condition of the prisoner does 
not appear from the Report. 

In the same division is found the case of the State 
vs. Hale, December Term, 1823, 2 Hawk's N. C. Rep., 
582, in which it was decided by Judge Taylor, as 
stated in the marginal note of the Reporter, that "a 
battery committed on a slave, no justification or cir- 
cumstances attending it being shown, is an indict- 
able offense." (Wheeler, pp. 239-40.) But this could 
not have been intended to apply to the case of a slave 
master abusing his oivn slave, as the case stands 
under the heading of "Liabilities of others to the 
master for abusing his slave." And in giving his 
opinion, Judge Tajdor said: "If such offenses may 
be committed with impunity, the public peace will 
not only be rendered extremely insecure, but the 

VALUE OF SLAVE PROPERTY MUST BE MUCH IM- 
PAIRED, for the offenders''^ [previously described as a 
low class of persons] '^can seldom make any reparation 
IN DAMAGES." "It caunot be disputed that a slave 
is rendered less capable of performing his master'' s 
service, when he finds himself exposed by the law 



MURDER OF SLAVES. 193 

to the violence of every turbulent man in the com- 
munity." 

We seem to have, here, a revelation of the exist- 
ing state of things in that community, which com- 
pelled the Courts, with the ready assent of the slave- 
holders, to make use of the criminal code to protect 
slave property ! And this perhaps explains, further, 
why it is that we find, in Wheeler's Law of Slavery, 
under the head of "Liabilities of others to the mas- 
ter for abuse of his slave," a number of Reports of 
criminal prosecutions, in the name of the State^ for 
battery and even for the murder of slaves ! What 
had seemed to us an inappropriate classification, is 
now, perhaps, explained. Irresponsible rowdies, "of 
dissolute habits," unable to pay "damages" to the 
'■'owner'''' of the slaves whom they may maim and 
murder, must be restrained and punished by the 
criminal code! 

" Hall, J. : I concur in the opinion given. I think 
it would be highly improper that EVERY assault and 
battery on a slave shoidd be considered an indictable 
offense," &;c. "Much depends on the circumstances 
of the case, when it happens," &c. 

Anomalies and self-contradictions may be expect- 
ed in slave jurisprudence, for slavery is an anoma- 
lous thing. The chattel principle is, however, the key 
to its mysteries. An " attempt to kill and murder" 
a slave is a blow at slave property. Even if an owner 
kills his slave, it famiharizes murder, and incites 
others to similar acts. 

In the case of State vs. Maner, it was decided that 
9 



194 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

"an assault ■witli intent to murder a slave is indicta- 
ble." (Wheeler, p. 244.) 

"Commonwealth vs. Carver, June T., 1827. 5 
Rand's Ya. Reports, 600. — The prisoner was indicted 
for feloniously, maliciousl}', and unlawfully shoot- 
ing, with intent to maim, disfigure, disable, and kill 
a negro man slave, of the name of Armistead, the 
PROPERTY of Andrew Houten^ under the Act of 9th 
of February, 1819. The Judge doubted whether 
a negro slave is the subject or person on which the 
offense created and the penalties prescribed by the 
Act can be committed or incurred, and adjourned the 
case to the General Court. 

^'Tlie Court — Brechenhrough^ «/., — after referring to 
Dolly Chappie's case, 1 Vii'g. Cas. 184, declared that 
the slave ivas a j)erson on whom the offense of stab- 
bing and shooting might be committed ; and that the 
Act was intended to protect slaves as well as free 
persons from such outrages. It may further be re- 
marked that there appears no reason, arising from 
the relation of master and slave, why a free person 
should not be punished as a felon for maiming a 
slave. Whatever poicer our laivs may give to the MAS- 
TER over his slave, IT IS AS IMPORTANT FOR THE 

INTEREST OF THE FORMER as for the protection of 
the latter, that A stranger should not be permitted 
to exercise an unrestrained authority over him. 
The opinion of the Court is, that judgment ought 
not to be arrested." ("Wheeler, p. 254.) 

The plain implication here is, that the power 
of the MASTER IS as unrestrained as was repre- 



MURDER OF SLAVES. 195 

sented and decided by Judge EufBn, as before 
cited. 

And in this case, again, we see tbe criminal law of 
"the State" wielded as a mere implement for enforc- 
ing " the liabilities of others to the master, for abusing 
his slave," to the injury of his "interests." 

In the case of Fields vs. the State of Tennessee, 
(Jan. T., 1829, 1 Virger's Reports, 156,) on writ of 
error to arrest judgment against said Fields, on a 
verdict against him for manslaughter, it was decided 
that "the felonious slaying of a slave without malice 
is manslaughter." Judgment affirmed. 

"We close our examination of "Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery on the topics involved in our present chap- 
ter, without having been able to ascertain a single 
instance in which a slave oivner has been contacted 
or even prosecuted for the murder of his oivn slave; 
nor have Ave found an exception to the statement of 
Judge Ruffin, before cited, that a "cruel and unrea- 
sonable battery on a slave" b}^ his owner, or hirer, is 
not an indictable offense, and that ^^ there have been 
no prosecutions of this sort^ Thus far, therefore, the 
statement of Judge Stroud, that " the master may, 
at his pleasure, inflict any species of punishment on 
the person of his slave," though contradicted by Mr. 
"Wheeler, stands imimpeached, so far as we can dis- 
cover, by any cases he has recorded in his compila- 
tion of Reports. Not even the case of Markham vs. 
Close furnishes any such instance, so far as appears 
from his Report of it. 

If it be said that a motive of self-interest in the 



196 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

master -would prevent his injQicting outrages upon 
his slave, Ave answer, (1.) That this restraint operates 
only in those cases where the injury would destroy 
his property in the slave, or impair his power to 
labor : it would be no protection against the infliction 
of any sufferings and indignities which fall short of 
this. (2.) Abundant evidence is at hand to prove 
that this motive is not^ in numerous instances, suf- 
ficient to restrain the passions of the masters, and 
prevent the maiming and killing of their own slaves, 
as will be shown in another chapter. (3.) Were it 
otherwise, the fact remains that the laiv does not protect 
the slave against his master. (4.) Anger and malice 
often act in opposition to self-interest. How comes 
it that " our books are full of criminal prosecutions 
for cruelty to horses and other animals," if the inter- 
est of the owner is itself a security against his abuse 
of his own property ? The malignant passions of 
the master are far more likely to be excited against 
his slave, who by a word or a look may dispute his 
authority, defy his power, or withhold the respect he 
claims, than by a dumb animal, governed only by 
natural instinct. 



CHAPTER XV. 

OF THE DELEGATED POWER OF OVERSEERS. 

All the Power of the Owner over his Slave is held and exercised also by Over- 
seers and Agents. 

We have, tlins far, considered cliiefly tlie power 
of the slave owner. It has been seen, likewise, that 
essentially the same power is lodged in the hirer of 
a slave. Incidentally, the power of overseers and 
agents has been alluded to. But we must now take 
a more distinct view of this feature of slavery. It 
has been expressed thus : 

^^All the -power of the master over the slave may he 
exercised^ not hy himself onhj^ in person^ hut hy any one 
ichom lie may depute as his agent. (Stroud's Sketch, 

Considering the judicial authority vested in the 
slave owner, whoever he nia}^ be, (drunk or sober,) 
and the duty of the "sheriffs" and public negro 
whippers to execute his decisions, (as already no- 
ticed,) this additional power of delegating his magis- 
terial dignity and authority to whomsoever (drunk 
or sober) he may think proper, becomes, a very re- 



198 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

markable one. Irresponsible liimself, and absolute, 
lie commits the same authority over the slave to a 
subordinate despot, responsible solely to himself. 

Louisiana, by express statute, enacts as follows : 
" The condition of a slave BEING MERELY 4 PASSIVE 
ONE, his subordination to his master, AND all who 
REPRESENT IIIM, is not susceptible of any modification 
or restriction^ (except in what can excite the slave to 
the .commission of crime,) in such manner that he 
owes to his master and to att Ids family a respect 
WITHOUT BOUNDS and an absolute obedience, and 
he is consequently to execute all the orders Avhich 
he receives from him or from them." (1 Martin's 
Digest, 616.) 

Thus does " the innocent legal relation" of slave 
ownership confer on every slave OAvner a power 
which no magistrate or government holds over //z'm, 
or over any subject or citizen ; and, not content with 
this, it clothes him wath the prerogative of transfer- 
ring this authority, not only hy the sale of the slave, 
but by verbal commission while he yet owns him. 
His wife, his housekeeper, his overseer, and even 
his young children share his unlimited power and 
authority over the slave, though at the age of three- 
score ! Instead of controlling his own children, the 
slave is controlled by the children of his master, and 
by hired overseers. 

The exception, in the statute just cited, informs us 
that Avhen the slave is "incited to crime" by the 
commands of his tyrant, whom he may not resist, 
he may nevertheless be held responsible for the 



POWER OF OVERSEERS. 199 

crime ! In its practical bearings, the law can effect 
nothing else, unless it be the martyrdom of the slave. 
Whatever crime he may be commanded to commit, 
he can lodge no information against his master, he 
can bear no testimony against him. If he persists 
in refusing to assist in the commission of the crime, 
his master may lawfully "chastise" him with the 
" moderate correction" that may cause his death, and 
then, if he "offers" resistance, he may be lawfully 
killed ! 

Louisiana is said to be the only State with an ex- 
press statute on the topic of the master's delegated 
authority, but the usage, recognized by the Courts 
as law, universally exists. "In the other slave 
States," says Stroud, (p. 44,) " the subjoined extract 
from Mr. Stephen's delineation of Slavery in the 
West Indies will, it is believed, accurately express 
the law and the practice : 

" ' The slave is liable to be coerced or punished by 
the whip, and to he tormented hy every species of per- 
sonal ill-treatment, subject only to the exceptions 
already mentioned, (i. e., the deprivation of life and 
limb,) hy the attorney, manager, overseer, driver, and 
every other person to icliose yovernment and control the 
owner may choose to subject him, as fully as by the 
owner himself. Nor is any special mandate or ex- 
press general power necessary for this purpose ; it is 
enough that the injlictor of the violence is set over the 
slave for the moment, or hy the owner or hy any of his 
delegates or suh-delegates, of ivhatever rank or character? 
(Stephen's Slaver}'-, p. 46.) 



200 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

" This power of deputation by the master is one 
of the degrading and distinguishing features of negro 
slavery. It was not permitted by the laws of vil- 
leinage," (Stroud, 13. 45. See 9 Coke's Eeports, 76 
A, &c. See Stephen, supra.) 

The following description of "ore?-5eers" is from 
William Wirt's Life of Patrick Henry: "Last and 
lowest, (i. e., of the different classes of society in Vir- 
ginia,) afeculum of beings called overseers ; the most 
abject, degraded, unprincipled race, always cap in 
hand to the Dons who employed them, and furnish- 
ing materials for the exercise of their pride, inso- 
lence, and spirit of domination," 

The great majority of slaves, male and female, 
labor on plantations, under the charge of these 
" overseers." The " house servants," as already seen 
by the statute of Louisiana, are under absolute sub- 
jection to every member of the family. Slaves hired 
out, waiters at hotels, &c., are, in tliis particular, in 
no better condition. Almost every where, they are 
controlled by others, in addition to the direct control 
of their owners. 



CHAPTER XVI. 
OF THE protectio:n^ of slave property from: 

DAMAGE BY ASSAULTS FROM OTHER PERSONS THAJS' 
THEIR OWNERS. 

Slaves are better protected as Propekty, than they are as Sentient Beings. 

It lias been represented tliat the slaves are suffi- 
ciently protected from outrage and murder on the 
part of those who are not their owners, by the fact 
that slave property is, of course, protected by law 
from such depredations, and that the interest of the 
master affords a guaranty for the enforcement of 
such laws. 

In our researches after the legal protection of 
slaves, in the preceding chapters, a large portion of 
all the legal proceedings that have come before us 
have been found to be of this character. Under the 
head of '^Masters' and others' liabilities for maltreating 
tlieir slaves," we have met, chiefly, with suits of mas- 
ters against the depredators upon their i^roi^erty! 
And what purported to be cnminal prosecutions, we 
have found, on inspection, to be State actions to pre- 
vent "damage" to the slaveholder. But we come 
9* 



202 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

now to consider, directly, tlie laws avowedly framed 
for that object. 

"Slaves, being objects of property, if injured by 
third persons, their owners may bring suit and re- 
cover damages for the injury. This is a maxim of 
the common law, in respect to property in general, 
and it may therefore be assumed to be the law of all 
the slaveholdiug States, in regard to slaves also." 
(Stroud's Sketch, p. 59.) 

Maryland. — Decision of Supreme Court : " There 
must be a loss of service, or at least a diminution of 
the faculty to labor, to warrant an action by the 
master." (1 Harris & Johnson's Eeports, 4; Corn- 
fute vs. Dale. Stroud, p. 59. Wheeler, p. 239.) 

South Carolina. — Act of 17-iO: "If any negro 
or other slave who shall be employed in the lawful 
business of his master, owner, overseer, &;c., shall be 
beaten, &c., by any person or persons not having 
sufificient cause or authority for so doing, and shall 
be maimed, or disabled by such beating from perform- 
ing his or her work, such person or persons, so offend- 
lug, shall forfeit and pay to the owner or owners of 
such ylaves, the sum o^ fifteen shillings current money 
per diem, for every day of his lost time, and also the 
charge of the cure of such slave." (2 Brevard's Di- 
gest, '231-2.) 

The workings of this law will appear in the fol- 
lowing: 

Constitutional Court of Appeals, South Carolina, 
1796. Sims White vs. James Chambers. — "Special 
action in the case for beating the plaintiff's negro 



DAMAGES DONE TO SLAVES. 203 

man." The negro was charged by his master with 
the care of a iishing-canoe, with strict orders not to 
let any one have it. The defendant persisted in 
taking it awa}^, and the negro persisted in forbidding 
him, "whereupon, defendant struck him a blow with 
his fist, then took a paddle^ knocked him down, and 
afterwards heat him severely, ivhich laid him up for 
several days, before he ivas able to go about his business 
againJ'' Verdict for the plaintiff. Damages £5, and 
costs. (2 Bay's Reports, 70.) 

A similar law exists in — 

Louisiana. — (Statute.) "If the slave {maimed, 
&c,) be for ever rendered unable to ivork, the offender 
shall be compelled to pay the value of said slave, ac- 
cording to the appraisement made by two freeholders, 
appointed by each of the parties ; and the slave thus 
disabled shall for ever be maintained at the expense 
of the person who shall have thus disabled him, 
which person shall be compelled to maintain and 
feed him, agreeably to the duties of masters and 
slaves, as ordered by this Act." (1 Martin's Digest, 
630-2.) 

ISToRTH Carolina. — It has been held that patrols 
are not liable to the master for inflicting punishment 
on the slave, unless their conduct clearly demon- 
strates MALICE AGAINST THE MASTER." (1 Hawks' 

Reports, 418, Tate vs. O'Neal.) 

Virginia. — Supreme Court of Appeals. May vs. 
Brown and Boisseau. Action of trespass, &c., for 
breaking into his close, and beating several of his slaves, 
so that he was deprived of their services for a long time. 



204: THE AMERICAN' SLAVE CODE. 

The defense in mitigation of damages was, that pZam- 
ti^ had given a general j)ermission to Brown (thougli 
not in liis employ as overseer) to visit his negro quar- 
ters, and chastise any of his slaves xcho might he found 
acting improperly! This defense failed, because 
BoissEAU, who had inflicted the beating, had re- 
ceived no such permission from the plaintiff. (1 
Munford's Eeports, 288. Stroud's Sketch, pp. 59-60. 
Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 248.) 

The workings of the principle of delegated au- 
thority are signally exemphfied in this last case. 

In Wheeler's Law of Slavery, the division or 
chapter entitled, ''Of the liability of others to the master 
for abusing Ms slave,''^ occupies about 27 pages. Some 
of the cases we have cited already. Under this 
head are classed several State prosecutions for crime; 
viz : State vs. Hale, State vs. Maner, State vs. Mann, 
(before Judge Euffin,) State vs. Cheatwood, State of 
Mississippi vs. Jones, and Commonwealth of Virginia 
vs. Carver, which we have before cited in our 13th 
and 14th Chaptere. Under this same classification, 
we found and cited also a number of civil prosecu- 
tions for killing slaves, some of whom were runa- 
ways. 

We will here glance hastily at a few other deci- 
sions of the same class. 

Smith vs. Hancock, 4 Bibb's Ky. Eep., 222.— 
" Held by the Court that in an action of trespass 
for beating a slave, the property of the plaintiff, 
whereby he died, the defendant may justify by showing 
that the slave was at an unlawful assembly, combining 



DAMAGES DOXE TO SLAVES, 205 

to rebel, and that lie refused to surrender, and 
resisted b}^ force." (Wheeler, p. 239.) 

Meetings of slaves for religious worship or mental 
instruction are " unlau-fid a^semhlies,^^ as will be 
shown in the proper place. 

In the case of Skidmore vs. Smith, the harhoring of 
slaves was the ground of complaint. (Wheeler, j). 
248.) It will not be claimed that there is anj 
valuable protection to the slave in this. 

Crawford vs. Cheney, A. D. 1824, 15 Martin's 
Louisiana Eep., 142, was "an action brought to 
recover the -price of a negro whom the plaintiff 
charges the defendant with having shot and killed." 
The testimony, it was argued, was weak. Judge Por- 
ter said: "TAe act charged here is one rarely committed 
in the presence of loitnesses ;'^ (owing, he might have 
added, to the law excluding colored witnesses.) He 
therefore allowed " presumptive evidence to support 
the verdict." (Weeeler, p. 249.) 

Jourdan vs. Patten, 1818 ; 5 Martin's Louisiana 
Eep., 615. — 'A suit for damages by injuring a slave, 
who was made blind by the assault. The defendant 
was adjudged to pay the price of the slave, and to 
take possession of him, as his property. Marginal 
note, (as a. rule of law estabhshed:) "If, on an injury 
to his slave, the plaintiff recovers his full value, the 
property is transferred to the defendant^ on payment of 
the judgment." (Wheeler, p. 249.) And so the 
disabled slave is "transferred" from perhaps a kind 
master or mistress, and from the presence of his 
wife and children, and the scenes of his childhood, 



206 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

and turned over to tlie tender mercies of his perse- 
cutor, rendered the more bitter against him for the 
losses sustained in the transaction, and the prospect 
of receiving no vahiable service from him ! And 
this is the protection (in this exigency) afforded to the 
slave by his master's right of prosecuting his as- 
sailant ! 

The Court, it seems, were not unaware of the 
effects of this decision. In making it, Judge Mat- 
thews said: "The principle of huraanity^ which 
would lead us to suppose that the mistress, whom 
he had so long served, would treat her miserable 
blind slave with more kindness than the defendant, 
to whom the judgment ought to transfer him, cannot 
he taken into consideration^ in deciding the case." And 
so the judgment of the "Parish Court" (which had 
decreed the payment of the price of the slave, with 
an additional annuity for his sustenance, and to re- 
main with the plaintiff) was reversed. (lb.) 

The benefit to the slave of this protection of slave 
property is sufliciently apparent. It is the master 
that is protected in his property^ not the slave in his 
right to security. The award is to his master, not to 
him. It is for the "loss of service" or "capacitj^ to 
labor," not for indignities and sufferings endured; 
it is for the injury of a working beast, not of a ynan ; 
for in this the maxim of the civil law holds good — 
" the slave is not capable of being injured!" Pro- 
perty damaged, or "mahce against the master,'' con- 
stitute the offense — compensation to the master is the 
redress! The "legal relation" of owner and pro- 



DAMAGES DONE TO SLAVES. 207 

pert J is worthily lionored and expressed in all this. 
Incidentally and remotely, the slave, it may be, in 
some instances, is protected by this from injuries 
that would otherwise cripple or kill him. The 
dread of the bill of "damages" may be some re- 
straint. Slender as it is, it is the hest^ if not the only 
protection afforded to him by the law. 

In one important and comprehensive view, this 
incidental and dubious protection^ if it he such, is an 
injury to the slave in the long run, and on the whole. 
It not only certifies and sanctions his degradation to 
the condition of a brute, but, in so doing, it stands in 
the way of any suitable legislative and judicial pro- 
tection. It is regarded as a substitute or equivalent 
for it. It not only prevents proper enactments and 
processes, but it vitiates those in existence and in 
use. We have seen how it confounds the criminal 
with the civil prosecutions for maltreating slaves, 
classifies indictments for murder under the head of 
" liabilities of others to the master for abusing his 
slave ;" makes the penal code the instrument of the 
slave owner, and seduces even the better portion of 
the judges, as in the case of "the State vs. Hale," 
(Wheeler, pp. 239— i3,) while making the most fa- 
vorable and merciful decisions known to slave juris- 
prudence, into the lamentable ex^jedient of grounding 
their decisions upon " the iiiierests" of the owner, and 
"^Ae value of slave property,^^ instead of the majesty 
of violated law, and the sacredness of human life ; 
or, perhaps, commingling incongruously the two 
classes of considerations! 



208 THE AMERIC.AJN" SLAVE CODE. 

As a matter-of-fact result of all this, we may well 
be assured tliat a judiciary and a community accus- 
tomed to award " damages^^ to a slave owner for the 
maiming and killing of his slave, will not long con- 
tinue to prosecute with efficiency any other — any 
criminal processes for the same acts. One punish- 
ment for one misdemeanor will be accounted suffi- 
cient. If the one is inflicted, the other will, as a 
general if not a universal fact, be withheld or 
evaded. On the first announcement of a barbarous 
or murderous outrage upon a slave, human nature 
even among slaveholders will gush forth, in demands 
for justice upon the perpetrator. An indictment for 
murder may be talked of, or even resorted to. In 
the mean time comes the "oit'?zer" with his suit for 
damages for loss of •pro'perli] I All eyes are directed 
to watch the result. The high tone of moral indig- 
nation gives place to an anxiety for the pending 
issue of dollars and cents ! If the defendant loses his 
case and pays the equivalent, the public feeling is 
appeased or modified. Perhaps a sympathy is got 
up in the defendant's favor. The indictment for 
murder slumbers, or results in an acquittal or a par- 
don. TJie man is not to he fined five hundred dollars 
and then hanged! And in a community wherein 
slaveholders administer the law, the prosecution for 
damages will be deemed of paramount importance. 



CHAPTER XYIL 

FACTS ILLUSTEATIXG THE KIKD AND DEGREE OF 
PROTECTION EXTENDED TO SLAVES. 

The extent, the atrocity, the frequency, and the impunity of barbarous outrages 
upon Slaves, show that the Laws afford them little or no protection. 

We liavc occupied so mucli space witli the laws 
on tlie subject of the protection of slaves, that we can 
spare little room for the abundant facts which cor- 
respond with and illustrate them. 

In respect to the murdering of slaves by white 
men, with general impunity, two propositions, if sus- 
tained, will settle the question. First, the murdering 
of slaves by white men has all along been, and still 
is, notoriously frequent. Not a few of these mur- 
dered their own slaves. Second, upon the most dili- 
gent inquiry and public challenge, for fifteen or 
twenty years past, not one single case has yet been 
ascertained"^ in which, either during that time or pre- 

* "We say " ascertained." We have already alluded to some few 
cases in Wheelei-'s Law of Slavery, wliich may have been of that 
character, though the result does not appear clearly, which is the 
more remarkable, as the compiler had called in question the state- 



210 THE AMEEICAN SLAVE CODE. 

viously, a master killing his slave, or indeed any 
other white man, has suifered the penalty of death 
for the murder of a slave. These two general facts, 
if they are foots, tell the whole story, so far as the 
'protection of the lives of slaves is concerned. 

At a time of much general excitement on this very 
question, during the period just now mentioned, 
(1839,) a case occurred which, it was generally sup- 
posed on all hands at the North, ivoulcl prove an 
exception. A Court in South Carolina convicted a 
white man of having murdered a slave, and sentenced 
him to death. Governor Butler declined to comply 
with an application for his pardon, assigning, as a 
reason, that the eyes of the civilized world were 
upon them, and that the reputation of the State was 
at stake. This appeal, it was supposed, would be 
sufficient, but it only added fuel to the general ex- 
citement occasioned by the unusual if not unprece- 
dented sentence of the Court. The whole State was 
in a ferment. The Court and the Governor were 
denounced. The press fulminated its anathemas; 
and before the day of execution arrived, the commu- 
nitv were quieted with the announcement that the 
prisoner had escaped! Whether the locks were 
opened with keys, or the bolts broken ; whether the 
walls were pierced or the windows opened ; or 
whether the higher or lower authorities connived, 
the great public never heard ! The Southern papers 

raent of Stroud. There may have been convictions, and sentences 
of death may have been passed, and the criminals permitted to 
escape, or pardoned. 



PRACTICAL PROTECTION. 211 

were watclied for announcements of executive offers 
of reward for the prisoner's apprehension, but none 
ever appeared. The fugitive was not a fugitive 
slave. He might come to the North, if he pleased, 
without danger that the arm of the Federal Govern- 
ment would molest him ! He was not guilty of re- 
belling against a slave owner'' s authority. He had 
only murdered a slave ! 

The frequency of such murders in South Carolina, 
so long ago as 1791, was publicly announced in her 
Courts of law, no one contradicting it. In the case 
of the State vs. McGee, Messrs. Pinkney and Ford, 
Counsel for the State, said: " T'/ze frequency of the 
offense {luilful murder of a slave) was owing to the 
nature of tlie i^unishment,'''' &c., (i. e., a pecuniary fine.) 
(1 Bay's Reports, 164. Vide Stroud, p. 39.) 

"In 1791, the Grand Jury for the District of 
Cheraw, (South Carolina,) made a presentment on 
the same subject, expressing their confidence that 
the Legislature would j)rovide some other more 
effectual measures to j)revent the frequency of 
crimes of this nature." (Matthew Carey's American 
Museum for February, 1791, Appendix, p. 10. Weld's 
Slavery, &c., p. 155.) Yet thirty more years elapsed 
before the penalty was changed, and still the law 
seems as powerless as ever. It is paralyzed by " the 
innocent legal relation" between an owner and his 
human chattel ! 

If any one doubts the frequency and the impunity 
of such murders, let him con over the attested facts 
in the book to which we have so frequently referred, 



212 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

"Weld's " Slavery as it is." Take a few specimens. 
On page 47 are four cases, related hj Eev. William 
T. Allan, son of a slaveliolding D.D. in Alabama. 

(1.) "A man near Courtland, Ala., of the name 
of Thompson, recently shot a negro ivoman throvigh 
the head, and put the pistol so close that her hair 
was singed. He did it in consequence of some diffi- 
culty in his dealings with her as a concubine. He 
buried her in a log heap ; she was discovered by the 
buzzards gathering around it." (2.) "Two men, of 
the name of Wilson, found a line-looking negro man 
at Dandridge's Quarter, without a pass, and flogged 
him so that he died in a short time. They were not 
punished." (3.) " Col. Blocker's overseer attempted 
to floo: a ncOTO. He refused to be flogsjed, where- 
upon the overseer seized an axe, and cleft his skull. 
The Colonel justified it." (4.) " One Jones whipped 
a woman to death for grabbing a potatoe hill." 

Comjjare these four cases with the slave laws al- 
ready cited. The" second and fourth, being deaths 
by whipping, Avould pass, probably, as cases of 
" death under moderate correction." The third. Col. 
Blocker's overseer, would be justified by a Court of 
law as readily as by the Colonel. The slave was 
"resisting" or "offering to resist" the overseer, and 
was therefore an outlaw. The first case is not quite 
as clear. If the concubine " resisted" or " offered to 
resist" Mr. Thompson's advances, whether revenge- 
ful or lustful, she came, plainly, into the same legal 
predicament, and was lawfully killed! For "the 
legal relation" must be maintained I But were not 



PRACTICAL PROTECTION, 213 

these flagrant cases of murder ? Take some other 
facts, furnished also by Mr. Allan on the page pre- 
vious, (46.) 

(1.) Mr, Turner stated that one of his uncles, in 
Caroline count}^, Virginia, had killed a woman — 
broke her skull with an axe-helve : she had insulted 
her mistress ! No notice was taken of the affair, 
(2.) Mr, T. said that slaves were frequentli/ murdered. 
(o.) In Mississippi a slave chanced to come forward 
hastily from eating, to hear the ' orders,' with a knife 
in his hand. The overseer, alarmed, raised his gun 
and shot him dead. He afterwards saw and con- 
fessed his mistake. But "wo notice was taken" of 
the killing. 

On page 50 will be found, by the testimony of 
Mrs, Nancy Lowry, a native of Kentucky, three 
cases of "premature deaths" — " generally believed 
by the neighbors that extreme whipping was the 
cause." Mr. Long, the inflictor and owner, was "a 
strict professor of the Christian religion," and 
" thought to be a very humane master." The victims, 
"John, Ned, and James, had wives," They were flog- 
ged frequently and "severely," " The cause of theu' 
flogging was, commonly, staying^ a little over the time, 
with their ivives /" 

On page 97, in the testimony of Eev, Francis Haw- 
ley, there is a characteristic case, A son of a slave- 
holder "took," as was believed, "the wife of one 
of the negro men. The poor slave felt himself 
greatly injured, and expostulated with him. The 
wretch took his gun and deliberately shot him. 



214 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Providentially lie only wounded him badly." This 

shows, however, the cause of many murders of slaves. 

In South Carolina, a phj-sician whipped his slave 

to death, "was tried and acquitted^ and the next year 

ELECTED TO THE LEGISLATURE!" (lb., p. 173.) 

"I know a local Methodist minister, a man of 
talents, and popular as a preacher, who took his 
negro girl into the barn to whip her, and she ivas 
brought out a corpse.^^ (p. 173.) This is the testimony 
of Mr. Geo. A. Averj^, of Eochester, K Y., Avho 
states further that the friends of the minister seemed 
to think it of "little importance to his ministerial 
standing.'''' Of course he was not indicted! This 
was in Virginia. 

A minister in South Carolina, a native of the 
North, had a stated Sabbath appointment to preach, 
about eioht miles from his residence. lie was in the 
habit of riding thither in his gig or sulkcy, after a 
very swift trotting horse, which he always drove 
briskly. Behind him ran his negro slave on foot,^ 
who was required to be at the place of appointment 
as soon as his master, to take care of his horse. 
Sometimes he fell behind, and kept his master wait- 
ing for him a few minutes, for which he always 
received a reprimand, and was sometimes punished. 
On one occasion of this kind, after sermon, the 
master told the slave that he would take care to have 
him keep up with him, going home. So he tied him 
by the wrists, with a halter, to his gig behind, and 
drove rapidly home. The result was that, about two 
or three miles from home, the poor fellow's feet and 



PRACTICAL PROTECTION. 215 

legs failed him, and lie was dragged on the ground 
all the rest of the way, by the wrists ! Whether the 
master knew it or not till he reached home, is not 
certain ; but on alighting and looking round, he 
exclaimed, "Well! I thought you would keep up 
with me this time !" so saying, he coolly walked 
into the house. The servants came out and took up 
the poor suiferer for dead. After a time he revived 
a little, lingered for a day or two, and died ! The 
facts were known all over the neighborhood, but 
nothinsr was done about it ! The minister continued 
preaching as before ; and another slave of his, una- 
ble to labor or walk, was seen laid under a shed, 
near the house, where he would have starved, but 
for the food thrown over the fence to him by some 
mechanics working near by, and which he devoured 
ravenously. He was sent off to the plantation, and 
soon after died. When that minister comes up to 
our General Assemblies, Annual Conferences, or 
May Anniversaries, he can doubtless tell us all about 
the " innocent legal relation" of slave owner, and how 
kindly the slaves are treated by their masters ! We 
should not publish this narrative, which has never 
before appeared in print, had it not been told to us 
by an eye-witness, with whom we are well ac- 
quainted, and in whose statements we can implicitly 
confide : Mr. John W. Hill, Green Point, near Ncav- 
York city. He saw the gig when it came up, with 
the slave dragging behind, and saw the minister 
alight and go in. 

"I knew a young man" (in Virginia — says Mr. 



216 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Geo. A. Aveiy, of Rochester, N. Y.) " who had been 
out hunting, and returning, with some of his friends, 
seeing a negro man in the road, at a httle distance, 
dehberately drew up his rifle, and shot him dead. 
Tlais was done without the sUghtest provocation, or 
a word passing. This young man passed through 
the form of a trial ; and although it was not even 
'pretended by his counsel that he was not guilty of 
the act, deliberately and wantonly perpetrated, he 
teas acquitted. It was urged by his counsel that he 
was a young man, (about twenty years of age,) had 
no malicious intention, his mother was a widow, &c., 
&c." (Weld's "Slavery as it is," p. 172.) 

The voung man or his mother probably paid the 
"owner" the value of the chattel, (if he icas a slave,) 
and he would perhaps be cautious in indulging his 
propensities as a sportsman, in shooting such expen- 
sive game, in future. In a civil suit of the "owner" 
for "damages," a jury of slaveholders would be less 
lenient. It would, however, be too much to expect 
of them that, for the same act, they would first oblige 
the unfortunate young gentleman to pay the market 
value of the commodity^ and then hang him for the 
murder of the man — especially where it is gravel}- 
maintained that satisfaction to the master is a sufli- 
cient protection to the slave! The facts, as thus 
stated, (the most charitable version that could be 
made,) present the most favorable illustration of the 
LAW. It would appear still worse if there was not 
even the pecuniary forfeiture. The facts and the law 
combined are the legitimate and natural results of 



PRACTICAL PROTECTION. 217 

"the legal relation of owner and slave." If the ^rm- 
ciple and the relation are right^ it might be difficult 
to show the practice to be wrong. Communities edu- 
cated in the former will be sure to become involved 
in the latter. 

Will it be said that these statements are only the 
fictions or exaggerations of Northerners ? Or that 
they describe only a few isolated cases ? Or that they 
apply only to the lower circles of society at the South '/ 
Listen, then, to a Virginian slaveholder, moving in 
the very highest circles of Southern society — the 
Hon. John Randolph, of Roanoke: 

"Avarice alone can drive, as it does drive, this in- 
fernal traffic, and the wretched victims of it, like so 
many post-horses, whipped to death in a mail- 
coach. Ambition has its cover-sluts in the pride, 
pomp, and circumstance of glorious war ; but where 
are the trophies of avarice ? The handcuffs the man- 
acle^ the hlood- stained cowhide! What man" is worse 

RECEIVED liSr SOCIETY FOR BEING A HARD MASTER ? 
Who DENIES THE HAND OF A SISTER OR DAUGHTER 

TO SUCH MONSTERS?" (Speech in Congress.) 

Study this picture. Wholesale murder — barbar- 
ism — cruelty. The general prevalence of these in 
the highest circles, and no one regarding the perpe- 
trators the worse for it, or shrinking back from the 
closest family affinity with "the monsters!" 

What jSTorthern pencil has drawn a more frightful 

picture of the slave States than this ? Old Virginia 

sat for the likeness, drawn by one of her most gifted 

sons ! Was John Randolph a slanderer, a fanatic ? 

10 



218 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Hear the testimony, then, of another honored son of 
Virginia, the sage of Monticello. 

" When the measure of their tears is full ; -when 
their GROANS have ixvolyed heaven itself in 
DARKNESS, doubtless a God of justice will Ksten to 
their DISTRESS." (Jefferson's Correspondence.) 

Recall to mind the wholesale murders of Gen. Wade 
Hampton, recorded in another connection, (Chap. XL) 
Remember the still more extensive and systematic 
murders of the Louisiana sugar planters, (Chap. Y.,) 
complacentl}^ regarded and connived at by pious 
slave-breeders in Virginia, (Chap. X.,) cold-blooded, 
calculating, diabolic, like that of pirates ; then say 
whether it be credible that such laAvs as have been 
reviewed in this chapter could protect the lives of 
slaves ! Say, rather, what possible enactments could 
avail for them, while the "legal relation" of slave 
ownership continues ? 

Lf any further light is wanted on that feature of 
the Slave Code that insultingly profters to the slave 
its protection from "rtni^suaZ" punishments, the in- 
quirer might see what punishments are ^^usuaV by 
looking over the advertisements and paragraphs of 
a dozen leading Southern journals, from as many 
different States, for twelve months. Cut out, ar- 
ranged, and pasted in a scrap-book, with an index, 
they would furnish him with a copious and authentic 
commentary on the slave laws. Every successive 
year, if he chose to repeat the process, would fur- 
nish a new volume. If he would save the labor, and 
avail himself of a faithfully collated scrap-book, made 



PRACTICAL PROTECTION. 219 

up to his hand, we refer liim to Weld's "Slavery as 
it is," large portions of which he will iind to have 
been gathered by this process. 

He will there find numerous advertisements of 
runaway slaves, and of jailers' notices of apprehen- 
sions and commitments of them, in which the descrip- 
tions specify scars from whipping, from iron collars, 
from gun-shots, from brandings, &c., &c. Many are 
described as having on handcufis, chains, and iron 
collars. One is "much marked with the whip" — • 
another "severely bruised"' — another, "a great many 
scars from the lash"' — another, " several large scars on 
his back from severe whijiping in early life f- — an- 
other "had a collar on, with one prong turned 
down" — another "had on a drawing-chain, fastened 
around his ankle with a house-lock" — another was 
"much marked with irons"' — another (negress Fanny) 
"had an iron band about her neck," &c., &c. All 
this, as the reader now knows, is authorized hy laio — 
not prohibited as '■'■ uniisiiaV^ 

Then comes another class, which, if not expressly 
authorized, are found by thevc frequency to be outside 
of the prohibited pale of '■'■unusual^ "Mary has a scar 
on her back and right arm, caused by a rifle hall" — 
another ^^ branded on the left jaw" — "Arthur has a 
scar across his breast and each arm, made by a 
knife ; loves to talk much of the goodness of God" — 
"George has a sword-cut, lately received in his left 
arm" — "Mary has a small scar over her eye, a good 
many teeth missing, the letter A branded on her 
cheek and forehead." Many others "scarred with 
the bite of a dosr." 



220 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

"Kax away, a negro woman and two children. 
A few days before she went off, / hurnt her with a hot 
iron on the left side of her face. / tried to make the 
letter M." 

Another class are described by mutilations which, 
though nominally prohibited by laAV, appear to be 
far from being '•'•unusual f and neither fear of law 
nor of public odium prevent the public advertise- 
ment of them. 

One "has only one eye;" another, "Kachel, has 
lost all her toes except the large one." " Joshua, his 
thumb is off, on the left hand." Another, " his right 
leg broken." "John, left ear crojjt;^^ another "has 
lost one of his ears." 

Many pages might be occupied with similar ad- 
vertisements, which appear in the most respectable 
Southern journals, with the names of the advertisers, 
many of them prominent citizens, and sometimes 
respectable ladies ! 

One case, on page 15 of Mr. "Weld's book, is 
doubtless a specimen of tens, if not hundreds of 
thousands ; assuredly it does not come under the 
condemnation of being " unusual ^ The "owner" 
of a female slave, who was a Methodist, proposed a 
criminal intercourse with her: she refused. He 
sent her to the " overseer" to be flogged. Again he 
made advances — again she refused, and again she 
was flogged ! Afterwards she yielded to his adul- 
terous wishes ! And now, the attentive reader of 
the preceding pages will have learned that all this 
was strictly within the protection of the law ! Its 



PRACTICAL PROTECTION. 221 

limitations this monster had not overstepped. At 
least, there is no adequate law for his punisliment — 
nay, so far as appears, there have been no legislative 
attempts or even ; xtcnsions to provide protection 
against sucJi outrages ! 

But details of this kind, on this subject, are always 
set down as exceptions. AYe turn, then, again to a 
specimen of general testimonies. 

Eev. George Whitefield, in his letter to the 
slaveholders of Maryland, Virginia, the two Caro- 
linas and Georgia, after admitting "particular excep- 
tions^'''' charges them, in general, with treating their 
slaves "worse than if they were brutes." He adds, 
"The BLOOD of them, SPILT for these many 
years in your respective provinces, will ascend up 
to heaven against you." 

William Pinckney, of Maryland, (1789,) calls 
Maryland "the foster-mother of petty despots, the 
patron of loanton oppression!'''' 

Dr. Jonathan Edwards, of Connecticut, (1791,) 
saj's, " The smack of the whip is all day long in the 
ears of those who are on the plantation, or in the 
vicinity; and it is used with such dexterity and 
severity as not only to lacerate the skin, but to tear 
out small portions of the flesh at almost every stroke. 

This is THE GENERAL TREATMENT of the slavCS. But 

niiany individuals suffer still more severely. Many 
are knocked clown; some have their eyes beaten out; 
some have an arm or a leg broken, or CHOPPED OFF ; 
and many, for a very small or for no crime at all, 
have been beaten to death," &c. 



222 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Joiix WooLMAN, of New-Jersey, (1758:) "Their 
punishment is often severe, and sometimes des- 
perate." (Journal, kc, p. 7-i.) 

George Buchanan, M. D., of Baltimore, (4th of 
July Oration, 1791 :) " Their situation" [the slaves'] 
^'' \s insuppor table : misery inhabits their cabins, and 
pursues them in the field. Inhumanly beaten, they 
OFTEN fall sacrifices to the turbulent tempers of 
their masters. Who is there, unless inured to 
savage cruelties, that can bear to hear of the INHU- 
MAN punishments daily inflicted upon the un- 
fortunate blacks, and not feel for them? Can a 
man, who calls himself a Christian, coolly and de- 
liberately tie up, tJiumb-screiv, torture luith 2^incers, 
and beat unmercifully, a poor slave, for, perhaps, 
a trifling neglect of duty ?" 

American Colonization Society : " We have 
never heard of slavery in any countrj-, ancient or 
modern, Pagan, Mohammedan, or Christian, so ter- 
rible in its character, as the slavery tvhich exists in these 
United States." (Seventh Report, 182-4.) 

The Presbyterian Synod of Kentucky (1834) 
said, '■''Brutal stripes, and all the varied kinds of per- 
sonal indignities, are not the only species of cruelty 
which slavery licenses." 

"They [the slaves] suffer all that can be inflicted 
by wanton caprice, by grasping avarice, by brutal 
lust, by malignant spite, and by insane auger. Their 
happiness is the sport of every whim, the prey of 
every passion that may occasionally or habitually 
infest the master's bosom." 



PRACTICAL PROTECTION. 223 

Rev. James A. Thome, now of Ohio City, a na- 
tive of Kentucky, and son of a slaveholder, says, 
"Slavery is the parent of more suffering than has 
flowed from any one source since the date of its 
existence. Such sufferings too! Sufferings incon- 
ceivable and innumerable ; unmingled wretchedness 
from the ties of nature rudely broken and destroyed ; 
the acutesi bodily tortures^ groans, tears and hlood; 
lying for ever in weariness and painfulness, in 
watchings, in hunger and in thirst, in cold and in 
nakedness." 

We forbear citing further witnesses. It is manifest 
that human chattels must be worse treated than 
brutes, in order to be kept in chattelhood. Other 
working animals are not punished as examples to 
their fellows. They are not the objects of suspicion, 
jealousy, lust, or revenge. They are not hated. 
They are not threatened. They are not conversed 
and quarrelled with. They cannot be regarded 
guilty, or proper subjects of censure or punishment. 
They have no aspirations above their condition. 
They have no keen sense of being injured by being 
imbruted. They can utter no provoking language, 
nor retort, nor retaliate. All these items are bul- 
warks of defense to the hrute, but inlets and avenues 
of attack upon the slave. The individuals and the 
classes of men most wronged^ are proverbially most 
hated by the wrong-cZoe?-. This is the dreadful doom 
of the poor negro, and he is completely under the 
power of his tyrant. As the exercise of despotic 
power over the defenseless makes men hardhearted 



224 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

and cruel, it is evident that the more absolute any 
despotism becomes, the more cruel will the persons 
become who administer it. And the most absolute 
form of despotism known among men, is that of 
human chattelhood in the United States of America, 
as its code proves. 

The unnatural and monstrous " legal relation" of 
slave ownership, unhumanizing human beings, in- 
sures cruelties that human language cannot describe, 
nor human imagination conceive ! No pencil can 
portray them ; no statistics exhibit the sum total. 
The slave code is sufficiently horrible, but every 
syllable of it can be written, printed, and measured 
by pages. The practical illustration has no limits ; 
its horrors swell into infinity ! 

" No people were ever yet found who were better 
than their" [living and recognized] "laws, though 
many have been known to be worse." 



CHAPTER XYIIL 

FUGITIVES FROM SLAVERY. 

The Slave, being Property, may he hampered or confined to prevent his escape- 
may be pursued and reclaimed — must not lie aided, or concealed from his 
Owner— and when too wild or refractory to be used by his Owner, may be 
KILLED by him with impunity. 

This topic is closely connected with those of 
several of the preceding chapters, and is, in some of 
its aspects, a branch of them. The laws on this sub- 
ject are too verbose and various to be transcribed at 
large, which would swell the volume and weary the 
reader. "SVe shall present only an abstract of what 
is characteristic and most important, connected with 
the usages under them. One design of these laws 
and usages is to prevent escapes ; another, to facili- 
tate recaptures ; another, to punish the fugitives and 
deter others ; another, to punish slaves, free colored 
people, or whites Avho may entice or aid the fugi- 
tives. 

Prevention of escapes is sometimes sought by the 

use of iron collars, chains, handcuffs, locks, &c., as 

before mentioned, whenever the "owner" or his 

agent thinks proper; and the law, as has already 

10* 



226 THE AMERICAN' SLAVE CODE. 

been seen, autliorizes tlii?, and punishes any one wlio 
may cut or break them. 

Another frequent precaution is the locking up of 
the slaves at night, and this, too, is within the law- 
ful power of the master, at his own discretion. 

In cities, corporate towns, &c., there are regulations 
forbidding the slaves or free people of color to be in 
the streets after a specified hour in the evening. At 
Wilmington, (K C.,)we kne^v a case (1821) in which 
the holding of a Methodist meeting (under charge 
of white persons) a few minutes too late, occasioned 
the locking up of one half the worshipping assembly 
in the watch-house, men, women, and children, till 
eight or nine o'clock the next morning, church 
members and all, when the legal forms were gone 
through with, to effect their release; in which it 
appeared that a "class-leader" at the meeting had 
" taken up" five members of his own " class," and all 
in obedience to "the law!" 

A general rule on plantations is, that slaves must 
not be absent from "quarters" in the evening, nor 
leave the plantation at any time without a written 
"pass." In at least some of the States, there are laws 
strictly enforcing this rule. Then, there are " patrols" 
established in city and country, regulated by law, 
and clothed Avith ample powers to arrest whom they 
please, and see that the existing laws and usages are 
enforced. 

An Act of Maryland, (1715,) chap. 44, sect. 6, "for 
the better discovery of runawaj's, &c., requires that 
'■'■ any 2Jer soil or persons ichatsoever,''^ travelling beyond 



FUGITIVE SLAVES. 227 

the limits of tlie county wlierein they reside, shall 
have "a imss under the seal of said county;" other- 
wise, "if apprehended, not being sufficiently known, 
nor able to give a good account of themselves," the 
magistrate, at his discretion, may deal with them as 
with runaways. (Stroud, p. 83.) This is particularly 
remarkable as being loithout distinction of color, and 
so apphcable to the class of low tvhites. These, how- 
ever, were to be released after six months, in dis- 
tinction from "negroes and mulattoes." 

To faciHtate recaptures, sect. 7 of the same Act — 
"for the better encouragement of all persons to seize 
and take up all runaways travelling ivithout pass, as 
aforesaid" — provides a bounty, in tobacco, (commuted 
for six dollars.) "to be paid by the owner" of said 
runaway ; " and if such suspected runaways be not ser- 
vants, and refuse to pay the same, he, she, or they 
shall MAKE SATISFACTION BY SERVITUDE OR OTHER- 
WISE, &c," In 1719, an additional provision author- 
ized the sheriff, in case of nonpayment of costs, &c., 
by these wronged and innocent free negroes and 
mulattoes, to sell them tcf the highest bidder ! ! ! 
This monstrous provision was afterwards expunged 
from the Code of Maryland, but not till after the 
cession of the Federal District, which therefore re- 
mains under the old law. And this furnishes the 
foundation of those laws of the Corporation of Wash- 
ington City by which, at the present day, free 
NEGROES or MULATTOES arrested as fugitive slaves, 
and not being claimed by any one, are held liable 
for their jail fees, and, in default of payment, sold 



228 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

into slavery. (Vide Jay's Inquiry, p. 154 ; and Jay's 
Yiew, p. 33, &;c., wliere it is shown that such, cases 
frequently occur.) 

It is made the official duty of sheriffs and con- 
stables to arrest suspected fugitives, and of jailers to 
commit them to prison. By law of Marjdand, (1723,) 
ch. 15, sect. 2, &c,, it is made the duty of the con- 
stables to repair monthly to all suspected places, and 
ichip every negro he finds there without a Hcense!* 
Owners of plantations, by the same Act, are required 
to send home to their masters any "strange negroes" 
on their premises ; they are authorized to icMp them, 
&;c. ; and forbidden to harbor or encourage them, on 
penalty of fine, &c. Same law in Federal District. 
(Suethen's Dist. Col., p. 18.) 

" In Georgia, any person may inflict twenty lashes 
on the bare back of a slave found without license on 
the plantation, or without the limits of the town to 
which he belongs. So also in Mississippi, Virginia, 
and Kentucky, at the discretion of the justice." 
(Jay's Inquiry, ]). 13-1.) 

" In South Carolina and Georgia, any person find- 
ing more than seven slaves together in the highway 
without a white person, may give each one twenty 

* In this aspect, the slave is neither treated as a man nor as a 
brute, but worse than either man or beast is treated! A man has 
tlie right of locomotion and social intercourse. And when a brute 
animal leaps his fence in quest of food or company, or to roam at 
large, no one thinks of treating liira as a criminal, of subjecting 
him to punishment. The power of the State is not in requisition, 
to send sheriffs and constables after him. 



FUGITIVE SLAVES. 229 

lastes." (lb.) Similar in Delaware: "more than six 
slaves." (Delaware Laws, 104, Stroud, p. 102.) 

This law has also been introduced into Florida, 
since its cession to the United States, contrary to the 
milder code of Spanish slavery. Many of the Indian 
slaves in East Florida, with most of the free people 
of color near St. Augustine, transported themselves 
to Havanna, as soon as they heard of the approach 
of the American authorities. (Stroud, p. 101.) 

" In Kentucky, Virginia, and Missouri, a slave, 
for keeping a gun, powder, shot, a dub, or other 
weapon whatever, offensive or defensive, may be 
whipped thirty-nine lashes, by order of a justice." (lb.) 

"In North Carolina and Tennessee, a slave travel- 
ling without a pass, or being found in another per- 
son's negro quarters or kitchen, may be whipped yb?-/?/ 
lashes, and evenj slave in whose company the visitor 
is found, ticenty lashes T (lb.) The visits of parents 
and children, husbands and wives, may be thus 
punished. 

" In Louisiana, a slave, for being on horseback, 
without the written j)ermission of his master, incurs 
twenty-five lashes ; for heeping a dog, a like punish- 
ment." (lb.) Horses and dogs, as well as weapons, 
might assist their escape. 

"By the law of Maryland, for 'rambling, riding, 
or going abroad in the night, or riding horses in the 
daytime without leave, a slave may be ivhipt, 
cropj^ed, or branded on the cheek with the letter R, 
or otherwise punished, not extending to life, or so as 
to unfit him for lahor^ " (lb.) 



230 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

In Greorgia and Soutli Carolina, " If any slave shall 
be out of the house, &;c., or off the plantation, &c., 
of his master, &;c., and shall refuse to submit to an 
examination by any white person, &c., such white 
person may apprehend and moderatehj correct him ; 
and if he shall assault or strike such white person, 
he may be lawfully Jcilled.^^ (2 Brevard's Digest, 231. 
Prince's Digest, 447. Sect. 5 of Act of 1770, and 
page 348, No. 43; title. Penal Laws. Stroud's 
Sketch, p. 101.) The reader will recollect here that 
"moderate correction," as legally defined, is such as 
may cause death ! And the slave not submitting 
quietly to this may be lawfully killed !" 

"If any slave shall presume to come upon the 
plantation without leave i7i writing from his master, 
employer, &;c., not being sent on lawful business, the 
owner of the plantation may inflict ten lashes for 
every such offense." (1 Yirg. Eev. Code of 1819, 
422-3. Mississippi Eev. Code, 371. 2 Littel and 
Suigert's Digest, 1150. 2 Missouri Laws, 741, sect. 
3. Maryland Laws, Act of 1723, chap. 15, sects. 1 
and 5.) 

North Carolina. — "J.?i2/ person may lawfully kill a 
slave who has been outlawed for running away and 
lurking in swamps," &c. (Act of 1741. Hay- 
wood's Manual, 521-2. Stroud, 103.) Similar in 
Tennessee. 

In Maryland and District of Columbia, '' If any 
negro or other slaves, absenting themselves from 
their master's service, running out' into the woods 
and there remaining, killing and destroying hogs 



FUGITIVE SLAVES. 231 

and cattle belonging to the people of this province, 
shall refuse to surrender themselves, and make 
resistance against such persons as pursue to appre- 
hend and take them tip, being thereunto legally 
empowered, it shall be lawful for such pursuers, 
■when such resistance is made, to shoot, kill, and 
destroy such negroes or other slaves." (Laws of 
Maryland, 1723, chap. 15, sect. 7. Snethen's Dist, 
Col.) 

In North Carolina, (as cited in the chapter pre- 
vious,) a proclamation of outlawry against a slave is 
authorized whenever he runs away from his master, 
conceals himself in some obscure retreat, and, to 
sustain life, " kills a hog, or some animal of the cattle 
kind." (See Haywood's Manual, "521. Act of 1741, 
chap. 21, sect. 45. Stroud, p. 38.) The same or 
similar in Tennessee. 

In Virginia, "in 1705, two justices of the peace 
were authorized, by proclamation, to outlaw run- 
awaijs^ who might thereafter be killed and destroyed 
by any person whatsoever, by such ways and means 
as he may think fit^ without accusation or impeach- 
ment of any crime for so doing." (Stroud's Sketch, p. 
103.) This Act was, however, repealed in 1792. (lb.) 

From an article in the Norfolk (Ya.) Herald of 
Feb., 1837, it however appears that a case of slave 
hunting and shooting had just occurred "near New 
Point Comfort." "It was not until a musket was 
lired at them, [the slaves,] and one of them slightly 
wounded, that they surrendered." (Weld's " Slavery 
as it is," p. 160.) 



232 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE, 

The customary usages of the South in general, on 
this subject, are such as to supersede the necessity 
of an}' formal proclamation of outlawry by the ma- 
gistrates. The more general laws, as in South Caro- 
lina, Georgia, Maryland, and District of Columbia, 
just now cited, sufficiently answer the same purpose. 

In South Carolina, " a slave endeavoring to entice 
another slave to run away, if provisions, &;c., be pre- 
pared, for the purpose of aiding such running away, 
shall be punished with death." (2 Brevard's Dig., 
233, 2-14.) "And a slave who shall aid and abet the 
slave so endeavoring to entice another slave to run 
away shall also suffer death." (Ibid.) An equivocal 
and unimportant modification of this Act was after- 
wards made. (Stroud, p. 104.) The "owner" of 
slaves sentenced to death is probably remunerated 
out of the public treasury. This is the law of Mar}-- 
land. (Laws of Maryland of 1737, chap. 2, and of 
1751, chap. 14. A^ide Snethen's Dist. Col., p. 16.) 

"If a slave harbor, conceal, or entertain another 
slave, being a runaway, in South Carolina and Geor- 
gia, he is subjected to corporal i^unishment to any 
extent, not affecting life and limb." (2 Brevard's 
Digest, 237. Prince's Digest, 452.) In Maryland, 
thirty-nine stripes is the penalty for harboring one 
hour. (Act of 1748, chap. 19, sect. 4.) 

In South Carolina, "if a free negro harbor, conceal, 
or entertain a runaway slave," he is fined ten pounds 
for the first day, and twenty shillings for every suc- 
ceeding day ; and if unable to pay the fines and 
charges, he may be SOLD at public outcry, and 



FUGITIVE SLAVES. 233 

the overplus, if any, paid into the hands of the 
pubHc Treasurer." (2 Brevard's Dig., Act of 1740.) 

In August, 1827, the Charleston Court passed sen- 
tence, according to this law, against Hannah Elliott, 
a free black woman, her daughter Judy, and her 
sons Simon and Sam, and they were sold into 
slavery. (Stroud's Sketch, p. 17.) Yet Judge 
Stroud is of opinion that that section of the Act of 
1740 had been repealed. (lb.) The law of 1821 
provides "corporal punishment, not extending to 
life or limb." (lb.) 

White as well as colored persons are forbidden, 
under heavy penalties, to entice, transport, or secretly 
carry away slaves. (Laws of Maryland of 1715, 
chap. 19, sect. 4. Snethen's Dist. Col., p. 12.) Also, 
forbidden to entertain slaves unlawfully absent. 
(Laws of Maryland, 1748, chap. 19, sect. 2, &c. 
Snethen, p. 17.) Also, masters of vessels to con- 
ceal slaves on board. (Laws of Maryland, 1753, 
chap. 9, sect. 3. Snethen, p. 19.) 

" By Aiken's Alabama Digest, p. 109, it is declared 
that ' any person or persons, being con-vdcted of har- 
boring or concealing any negro or negroes belonging 
to any other person or persons whatsoever, or suffer- 
ing the same to be done with his consent or know- 
ledge, shall he fined in a sum not exceeding seven 
hundred dollars, and shall he imprisoned not less than 
one calendar month, nor exceedhig six calendar 
months; and shall be liahle in damages to the party 
injured, to be recovered by action on the case before 
any tribunal having competent jurisdiction.' And 



234 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

similar enactments are to be found in the statute 
hooks of the other States." (Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery, note, pp. 264-5.) 

Giving passes to slaves is prohibited in Maryland 
by Act of 1796, chap. 67, sect. 20. (Snethen, p. 29.) 

And "free negroes or mulattoes" who may sell or 
give away their "certificates of freedom," maybe 
fined $300, which, if not paid, may be raised b}^ the 
sale of such free persons into slavery ! (Laws of 
Maryland, 1796, chap. 67, sect. 18. Snethen, pp. 
28-9.) 

By Act of Congress of 1852, heavy penalties are 
imposed upon all persons who knowingly entertain 
or aid fugitive slaves; and it is made the duty of 
United States Commissioners, Marshals, and "all 
good citizens," to assist in returning them. 

In our examination "of the laws concerning the 
murder and killing of slaves," (Chap. XIV.,) we had 
occasion to cite some cases from "Wheelers Law of 
Slavery, by which it would appear that the Courts 
are quite familiar with such occurrences as the shoot- 
ing and killing of fugitive slaves, since the owners 
often bring suits against the "hunters" for damages 
in killing them ! And these suits are as coolly argued 
and disposed of as if it were a question of the shoot- 
ing of a mad bull. Sometimes, where the shooting 
appeared to have been needless, "rash, and incau- 
tious," the plaintiff recovered damages. Other cases 
conclude with "judgment for the defendant." 

The subject of "Eunaway or fugitive slaves" oc- 
cupies a distinct division or chapter, of above a dozen 



FUGITIVE SLAVES. 235 

pages, in Mr. Wheeler's Compilation of Reported 
Cases. The decisions of the Courts are in harmony 
with the statutes already cited, and show that they 
are not a dead letter. We refer to a few cases. The 
first case introduces us to Slave Law as expounded in 
the State of New- York : 

Glen ^-5. Hodges, Jan. T., 1812 ; John's New- York 
Eeports, 67. Trespass for taking the plaintiff's slave. 
The fugitive had been seized by his master in Yer- 
mont. The defendant, who had a claim on the negro 
for debt, pursued him, and, with a writ of attach- 
ment, took him from the plaintiff's possession, and 
imprisoned him for debt. It was decided that the 
contract with a slave was void, and therefore the 
defendant had no right to take him. (Wheeler, pp. 
266-7.) 

Hutchins vs. Lee, Dec. T., 1827; Walker's Miss. 
Eeports, 293. In this case it was decided that in the 
sale of a fugitive slave by a sheriff, "if the slave sell 
for less money because of any neglect in the sheriff 
to perform his duty, the remedy is by an action 
against the sheriff for damages." (lb., p. 270.) 

Labranche vs. Watkins, June T., 1816 ; 4 Martin's 
Louisiana Reports, 391. This was a litigation be- 
tween a slave owner and the sheriff, who had had 
him in custody as a runaway. The sheriff sold the 
slave, then bought him back of the purchaser. The 
Court decided the act of the sheriff to be fraudu- 
lent, and that "a runaway slave cannot be sold by 
the sheriff till he had been advertised two years." 
(Wheeler, pp. 275-6.) 



236 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Under the head of "harboring slaves," in Wheel- 
er's Law of Slavery, a number of cases are put down, 
e.g.: 

Scidmore vs. Smith. The Court decided that "the 
penalty for harboring slaves is cumulative, and does 
not destroy the common law remedy." (p. 442.) That 
is, the penalty for the criminal act is in addition to 
the damages that may be claimed by the master in a 
civil suit. 

AYe need occupy little space with proofs that the 
part of the Slave Code contained in this chapter, 
frightful as it is, is not a dead letter! SlaA'c hunts, 
Avith muskets and bloodhounds, are too horribly 
frequent, by the testimony of the Southern journals, 
to admit of any doubt on this subject. And so are 
advertisements of runawa}^ slaves by their owners, 
with offers of reward for them, ^'■dead or alive'\t or 
"for killing them," or for "evidence of their being 
killed!" Of such slave hunts the inquirer may find 
ample details in Weld's "Slavery as it is," pp. 21, 
97, 102, 108, 155, 160. Specimens of such adver- 
tisements may be found on page 156 of that book, 
together with a proclamation of outlawry, and an 
announcement of the consequent "killing" of a 
negro. 

The following advertisement is from the Ouachita 
Register^ a newspaper dated "Monroe, La., Tuesday 
evening, June 1, 1852" : 

" X E G R O DOGS. 

" The undersigned Avould respectfully inform the 
citizens of Ouachita and adjacent parishes, that he 



FUGITIVE SLAVES. 237 

has located about 2^ miles east of John "White's, 
on the road leading from Monroe to Bastrop, and 
that he has a fine pack of Dogs for catching negi'oes. 
Persons wishing negroes caught will do well to give 
him a call. He can always be found at his stand 
when not engaged in hunting, and even then infor- 
mation of his whereabouts can always be had of some 
one on the premises. 

Terms. — Five dollars per day and found, when 
there is no track pointed out. When the track is 
shown, twenty-five dollars will be charged for catch- 
ing the negro. 

Monroe, Feb. 17, 1852. M. C. GoFF." 

With a full knowledge of these laws and of these 
facts, nay, under the hardening effects of familiarity 
with them, our leading statesmen and religious teach- 
ers will affect to believe that the slaves are contented 
and happy in their present condition. In almost the 
same breath they will exhort us to the patriotic and 
Christian duty of enforcing the infamous Fugitive 
Slave Bill ; quote the Bible and the Constitution to 
sustain their exhortations ; and then complain of 
being slandered, if accounted pro-slavery ! 

" No people were ever yet found who were better 
than their [recognized and living] laws, though many 
have been known to be worse." 

Judge Tucker, Professor of Law in the University 
of William and Mary, Virginia, speaking of this law 
of "outlawry" of runaways, and others of a similar 
nature, said: "Such are the cruelties to which 
SLAVERY gives birth; such the horrors to which the 



238 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

human mind is capable of being reconciled bj its 
adoption.''^ (Stroud, p. 103.) 

The tree is known bj its fruit. The laws on this 
subject, State and national, are but the natural pro- 
geny, as they are also the indispensable defenses of 
"the innocent legal relation," Kepeal them, and 
slave "property" takes to itself legs, and runs away. 
To recognize the right of "property"' is to recognize 
the right of reclaiming it, and the duty of its restor- 
ation. But it is hkewise to reverse the divine law : 
"Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant 
which is escaped from his master unto thee : He shall 
dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which 
he shall choose, in one of thy gates, where it liketh 
him best: thou shalt not oppress him." (Deut. xxiii. 
15, 16.) 



CHAPTER XIX. 

THE SLAVE CANXOT SUE HIS MASTEE, 
Slave Property cannot litigate with its Owiier ! 

The slave is a "chattel ;'' his master is his " o\viier." 
This " legal relation" precludes the idea of a suit at 
law between them, especially a suit in which the 
chattel should be plaintiff! As a horse or an ox 
cannot sue his owner, so neither can a slave ; for 
"slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed and 
adjudged in law to be chattels personal, &c., &c., to 
allintejits, constructions^ and purposes ichaUoevery "A 
slave is one who is in the power of his master, to 
whom he belongs^ These all-comprehensive defi- 
nitions are not a dead letter, and they accordingly 
settle, at every step, every question that can be raised 
concerning the condition of the slave. This is "the 
legal relation," and the whole of it. If this be 
tolerated, all the rest of the system, in all its parts, 
and in all its legitimate and natural workings and 
results, may be tolerated likewise. The parts, sever- 
ally, cannot be worse than the whole. 

"A slave cannot be a party before a judicial tri- 



240 THE AMERICAJN^ SLAVE CODE. 

bunal, in any species of action against his master, 
no matter how atrocious may have been the injury 
■which he has received from him.'' (Stroud's Sketch, 
p. 57.) 

"We cited this paragraph in our Chapter IX., in 
proof of the master's " unhmited power." In the 
chapters succeeding it has been shown that the laws 
ostensibly framed for the j^rotection and redress of 
the slave are of no value to him. A^id no where have 
we found any provision for a suit at law hy €ie slave 
against his master. If the master assaults his life, if 
he inflicts torture, if he takes away his wife by force, 
or ravishes her before his eyes, neither he nor his 
wife can bring him to trial, nor enter complaint or 
bear testimony against him. If any instance has oc- 
curred, amid the outrages of the last two hundred 
years, let it be produced. 

" The law is unquestionably as stated above, with- 
out any exception or limitation." (Stroud's Sketch, 
p. 57.) * 

The proposition at the head of this chapter, that 
"a slave cannot sue his master,^^ is involved, of ne- 
cessity, in the still more comprehensive One (which 
will be established when we come to treat of "the 
civil condition of the slave") that a slave cannot he 
a ixirty in any civil suit ivhatsoever. It would be 
absurd to suppose that he could maintain a suit 

* The case of an allerjed slave bringing a suit for liis freedom 
(which will be considered in its place) is not nn exception to the 
above proposition, because the question wliether the plaintiff be a 
slave is still to be settled, and is not to be taken for granted. 



OWXER CANNOT BE SUED. 2-il 

against 7iis owner^ when lie could maintain a suit 
against no body else. And it would be equally absurd 
to suppose that he who could 2^ossess nothing, if he 
should gain a suit, could have any power to bring a 
suit before the Courts for so idle a purpose. The 
testimony of Mr. Wheeler to this point, in his " Law 
of Slavery," p. 197, we reserve for its more appro- 
priate place hereafter, but refer to it here, for the 
convenience of the inquiring reader. 

The following cases, extracted from the same au- 
thor, will, however, be as appropriately inserted here 
as elscAvhere, though they prove 7nore than the mere 
proposition now before us: 

" Berard vs. Berard et al., Feb. Term, 1836 ; 9 Loui- 
siana Kep., 156. 

"Pe?- Cur., Martin, J. : The plaintiff is a person, 
and SUES her aunt, Marie Louise Berard, for the 
purpose of establishing her and her children's claim 
to their freedom. The defendant disavowed any title 
to the plaintiff, but averred that she belonged to her 
late sister, Marie Jeane Berard, and that she descended 
to her sister's jiaiural children and legal heirs, CeHna 
and Antoine Garidel. These heirs intervened, and 
claimed the plaintiff and her children as their pro- 
perty, in the right of their deceased mother. The 
case was tried by a jury, who found a judgment for 
the intervening party, and the plaintiff appealed. 

" The Court instructed the jury that the inter- 
veners ivere not boicnd to show their title. The plaintiff 
excepted. 

" On a full consideration of the case, this Court is 
11 



242 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

of opinion that the instruction given to the jury by 
the District Judge was correct, A slave cannot 
stand in judgment for any other purpose than to 
assert his freedom. He is not even allowed to con- 
test the title of the person holding him as a slave." 
(Wheeler's Law of Slavery, 197-8.) 

This decision covers the entire ground of the in- 
capacity of the slave to sue his master, or any other 
person. And it lifts the curtain from the scenery of 
society in a slaveholding community. It shows us a 
niece, suing her aunt for her freedom — the aunt 
claiming her niece as a slave, not for herself, but on 
behalf of two other nieces — those nieces coming for- 
ward to claim their cousin and her children as their 
slave — the Court and Jury sustaining the claim with- 
out calling upon the claimants to show their title — 
the Supreme Court, "on a full consideration of the 
case," confirming the decision, and all as coolly as if 
the claim were for a horse ! yet upon a principle by 
which no horse could be held, without showing a 
title ! This is slavery in the concrete, as actually 
existing, sanctioned by the Courts, and not merely 
an abstraction. 

The case that follows has been twice alluded to 
already, and may be referred to again. We give it 
in full here : 

" Dorothee vs. Coquillon et al., Jan. T., 1829 ; 19 
Martin's Louisiana Kep., 350. 

"Appeal from the Parish Court of the parish and 
city of New-Orleans. 

"Per Car., 2Iartin, J. : The plaintiff, a free woman 



^- 



OWNER CAXXOT BE SUED. 243 

of color, complained that lier cliild was directed to 
be emancipated at the age of twcntj-one, hj the will 
of her mistress, who bequeathed her services, in the 
meanAvhile, to defendant's daughter, who is still a 
minor ; that the will requires the child to be edu- 
cated in such a manner as may enable her to eai n her 
livelihood when free ; that no care of her education is 
ta/cen, and site is treated cruelly. The prayer of the 
petition is, that the child be declared free at twenty- 
one, and in the meantime hired out by the sheriff. 
The answer denies the plaintiff ^s capacity to sue ; that 
she has any cause of action ; and the general issue is 
pleaded. The petition ivas dis^nissed, and the plaintiff 
appealed. The plaintiff cannot sue for her minor 
daughter, in a case in which the latter could not sue 
were she of age. The daughter is a statu liher, and 
as such, a slave till she reaches her twenty-first year. 
Clefdes loix romaines verhi statu liher. As a slave, she 
can have no action except to claim or prove her 
liberty. (Civil Code, 177.) Her right to her free- 
dom will not begin till she is twenty-one ; if in the 
meantime the legatee fails to perform the conditions 
of the bequest, and the heirs of the testatrix have 
the legacy annulled therefor, the statu liher must con- 
tinue a slave in the meanwhile, and her services 
enjoyed by her heir ; so that the object of the suit, 
so far as concerns her, is relief from ill treatment^ 
ichich a slave cannot sue for. The plaintiff is with- 
out any right of action. Judgment affirmed, with 
costs." (Wheeler's Law of Slavery, pp. 198-9.) 
And so the poor free colored woman loses her 



2-i-i THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

case in behalf of her slave daughter, who is to he free 
at tw'entj'-one, and is saddled with the costs of two 
Courts, because she did not know better than to 
suppose that a slave might sustain an action against 
her master for ill-treatment, and that the conditions 
of the Will would be enforced bj the Courts ! 



CHAPTER XX. 

NO POWER OF SELF-REDEMPTIOX, OR CHANGE OF 
MASTERS. 

The Slave, being a Chattel, has no power of Sell'-redemption, nor of an exchange 
of Owners. 

An ox cannot bu}'" himself of liis owner, nor 
transfer himself to the ownership of another. Here 
again, " to all intents, constructions, and j^urposes 
whatsoever," the slave is on a level with other work- 
ing chattels ! This must be his predicament in the 
very nature of the case, if the principle of chattelhood 
is to be consistently maintained. 

" Slaves cannot redeem themselves, nor obtain a 
change of masters, though cruel treatment may have 
rendered such a change necessary for their jDcrsonal 
safety." (Stroud's Sketch, pp. 57^8.) 

It is of American slavery in the nineteenth cen- 
tury of the Christian era, and among a people 
boasting their pure religion and their free institu- 
tions, that this is affirmed. Among ancient heathen 
nations were found laws providing that slaves abused 
by their masters might apply to the magistrates, 
who would order them to be sold to a new master. 



246 THE A3IERICAX SLATE CODE. 

In Mississippi, as before noticed, the Constitution 
lias empowered the Legislature to enact such a law, 
but the Legislature have not seen fit to exercise the 
j)ower. 

In Louisiana, the new Civil Code contains a regu- 
lation looking apparently in that direction, but diffi- 
cult, if not impossible, to be made effective. It is 
as follows : 

" No master shall be compelled to sell his slave, 
but in one of two cases, to wit : the first, when, being 
only co-proprietor of the slave, his co-proprietor de- 
mands the sale, in order to make a partition of the 
propert}'- ; second^ when the master shall be CON- 
TICTED of cruel treatment of his slave, and the Judge 
shall deem it projxr to pronounce, besides the penalty 
established for such cases, that the slave shall be sold 
at public auction, in order to ^^l^^ce him out of the 
reach of the power which his master has abused." 
(Art. 192.) 

It is to be noticed here, that the Judge is only 
empowered, not directed, to make such a decree. He 
may apply merely the other 23enalties alluded to, and 
which have already been examined, (Chap. XIII.) 
The master must be convicted of cruelty by 
"white" testimony, by ar Court and jur^^ of slave- 
holders, and amid legal rules and usages that express- 
ly authorize chastisement with rigor, proA-ided it be 
not " uniisual,^^ nor " so as to maim or mutilate," or 
endanger life. (Civil Code of Louisiana, before cited, 
Chap.XllI.) 

It is not known that this law of Louisiana has 



NO RIGHT OF REDEMPTION. 247 

ever been enforced, and no otlier slave State in tlie 
Union, so far as we know, lias any similar provision, 
though, they are careful to provide, in this particular, 
for the security of indented apprentices. Without a 
change of masters^ it is evident that no other laws 
against cruelty would be of any value. To punish 
an owner or overseer for abusing a slave, (even if it 
ever were done,) and then send the slave back again 
to be under the power of the same tyrant, (enraged, 
as he would be, at his punishment,) would only be to 
secure fresh injuries in secret. 

As to the slave's power of self-redemption, there 
is no legal provision for it in any of our American 
slave States. Under the Spanish laws — as, for ex- 
ample, in Cuba — a slave may apply to the proper 
magistrates and be appraised. If, within a specified 
period, by the assistance of friends, or by a custom- 
ary if not prescribed arrangement with the master, 
and by his own extra exertions, the amount of the 
appraisal can be raised, he becomes free. In this 
way many emancipations take place, as was also the 
fact among the ancient heathen. Our Christian and 
Protestant slavery knows no relaxation of the kind ! 
The late U. S. Senator, James D'Wolfe, of Ehode 
Island, who owned a slave plantation in Cuba, and 
who was, in early life, a captain or supercargo of a 
slaver to Africa, was wont to dwell with satisfaction 
on this feature of Cuban slaver}^, and to congratulate 
himself that he was not a slaveholder under our 
American Code, which allowed no opportunity to an 
industrious and enterprising slave to become free. 



CHAPTER XXI. 

THE KELATION HEREDITAKY AXD PERPETUAL. 

Slaves being held as Property, like other domestic animals, their Offspring are 
held as Property, in perpetuity, in the same manner. 

"The law of South Carolina says of slaves, 'All 
tlieir issue and tlieir offspring, born or to ieborn, shall 
be, and are hereby declared to be, and remain for 
EVER HEREAPTER, absolute slaves, and shall follow 
the condition of the mother.''^ (Jay's Inquiry, p. 129. 
See Act of 174:0. 2 Brevard's Digest, 229.) 

In Maryland, "All negroes and other slaves, al- 
ready imported or hereafter to be imported into this 
pro\T.nce, and all children, now horn or hereafter to he 
horn of such negroes and slaves, shall he slaves during 
their natural livesJ^ (Act of 1715, chap. 44, sect. 
22. Stroud's Sketch, p. 11.) 

Similar in Georgia. (Prince's Dig., 446. Act of 
1770.) And in Mississippi. (Revised Code of 1823, 
p. 369.) And in Virginia. (Revised Code of 1819, 
p. 421.) And in Kentucky. (Littell and Swigcrt's 
Digest, 1149-50.) And in Louisiana. (Civil Code, 
art. 183.) In all these laws it is laid down that the 
child follows the condition of the mother, whoever 



SLAVERY HEllEDITARY — PERPETUAL. 249 

the fatho' may be ! The same usage, whether with 
or without written law, prevails in all our slave 
States; and under its sanction, the slave "owner" 
very frequently holds and sells his own children as 
"property," though sometimes as white as himself. 

" That IS property which the law declares to be 
propert}^ Two hundred years of legislation have 
sanctified and sanctioned negro slaves as property." 
(Henry Clay; Speech, U. S. Senate, 1839.) 

So also Mr. Gholson, in the Legislature of "Vir- 
ginia : " The owner of land has a reasonable right 
to its annual produce, the owner of brood mares to 
their products, and the OAvner of female slaves to 
their increase." 

Thus the perpetuity of slavery grows out of its 
hereditary transmission, and this again comes from 
its tenure of chattelhood. If the "legal relation" 
be vahd and innocent, there can be no argument 
admitted against the right of its perpetuity; and 
slave proj)erty may be held so long as other property 
is held.. The duty of a future liberation would 
imply the unlawfulness of present possession. In- 
telligent slaveholders, perceiving this, are careful to 
fortify their present claims upon human chattels, by 
enactments seeking the perpetuity of the system. 

In Jamaica, before emancipation, the mixed breed, 
at the fourth degree of distance from the negro an- 
cestor, were liberated by express laAV. In the other 
British West India Islands, a similar custom pre- 
vailed. (See Stephen's West India Slavery, p. 27, and 
Edwards' West Indies, book 4, chap. 1.) In the 
11* 



250 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Spanisli and Portuguese colonies, (probably, also, in 
tlic Frencli,) a similar usage is believed to prevail. 
(Vide Stroud's Sketcli, p. 14.) Not so in our North 
American slave States, where biblical defenses of 
slavery, on the pretended foundation of Hebrew 
servitude, forget to define it by the Hebrew usages, 
and are resorted to in defense against the proclama- 
tion of the Hebrew Jubilee ! By this process, and 
by -defenses of or apologies for "the legal relation" 
of slave ownership, the idea of " rights of property " 
is sustained, which includes the right of perpetuity, 
of course, and makes it a work of supererogation to 
emancipate. Kefusing to do so, the citizen remains 
as good as the laws; and the Christian (so he is 
taught) as good as the apostles and Moses, so far as 
the slave question is concerned. With "fanatics" 
he leaves it to attempt being better. Hence, the 
people (with few exceptions) are "no better than 
their laws" in this matter. 



CHAPTER XXII. 

RIGHT TO EDUCATION — RELIGIOUS LIBERTY — 
RIGHTS OF CONSCIENCE. 

Tlie Slave, being held as a Chattel, is held by a tenure which excludes any 
legal recognition of his rights as a thinliing and religious being. 

We are not now speaking of laws or of usages that 
directly infringe such rights and prohibit their exer- 
cise. TJiere are such laws, and we shall give some 
specimens of them, when we come to inquire after 
the condition of the slave in relation to civil society/^' 
At present, we are only unfolding to view "iAe legal 
relation of master and slave.'^ We affirm that a recog- 
nition of the validity or lawfulness of that relation 
is equivalent to a denial of the literary and religious 
rights of the slave. And if that relation be an 
innocent one, then the denial and the withholding 
of those rights, AS rights, are innocent likewise. 
The mere bestowal of 2'>nvileges^ with the permission 
to enjoy them, is not the recognition of rights ; it is 
rather an implied denial of their existence. Men 
do not grant j^ermission nor. confer privileges where 



* Chapters YI. and VII., Part XL 



252 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

they recognize rifiJits. The power to permit and to 
confer^ carries with it the power to refuse and to 
withhold. Both the master and the slave understand 
this, where permissions are most frequently given. 
It is injurious to confer, as it is degrading to accept 
as a boon, what belongs to every man as man, by 
absolute and inherent eight. The rights of inves- 
tigation, of free speech, of mental culture, of religious 
liberty, and of conscience, are of this class. Man 
may no more affect to confer them or permit their 
exercise, than he may presume to take them awa}-. 

The statement, then, is not that slave masters do 
not educate nor permit the education of their slaves, 
nor allow nor furnish them the benefits of religious 
instruction and social worship. As a general state- 
ment, with particular and local exceptions, it might 
be made and sustained, as will appear in its allotted 
place. But we waive and pass by all this, for the 
present, to afi&rm distinctly that " the legal relation" 
of slave ownership, in America, as defined by the 
code that upholds it, is a relation that cannot and 
does not consist with the recognition (either in 
theory or practice) of the intellectual and religious 
RIGHTS of the slave. 

The slave "is a chattel." But chattels have no 
literary or religious rights. He is a chattel " to all 
intents, constructions, and pioposes whatsoever." 
Ho is "in the power of a master, to whom he be- 
longs " — " entirely subject to the will of his master " 
■ — "not ranked among sentient beings, but among 
things." It would be an absurdity for such a code to 



SPIRITUAL DESPOTISM. 253 

recognize the slave as possessing religious rights. It 
is free from any such absurdity. 

Except the provisions, in some of the States, for 
the ''hcqAisiii'" of slaves, and for their "spiritual 
assistance when side,'' (see Chap. VII., Part II.,) we 
have found no recognition of their religious wants, 
their religious natures, or immortal destinies. Even 
here they seem to be considered passive beings, whose 
salvation is to be bestowed by their masters. The 
American Slave Code, from beginning to end, knows 
no rights of conscience in its subjects. The master 
is to be implicitly obeyed. His will is to be law. 
The slave is allowed no self-direction, no sacred 
marriage, no family relation, no marital rights — none 
that may not be taken away by his master. 

Keligion and its duties are based on human re- 
lations, including family relations. These relations, 
the "relation of slave ownership" and chattelhood 
abrogates. Eeligion requires and cherishes self-con- 
trol ; but the " owner's " authority supersedes and 
prohibits self-control. Eeligion implies free agency ; 
but "the slave is not a free agent." His "condition 
is merely a passive one." So says the Slave Code, 
and so says ecclesiastical law, and therefore releases 
him from the obligations of the seventh command- 
ment. Witness the decision of the Savannah River 
Baptist Association, Avhile allowing its slave mem- 
bers, without censure, to take second or third com- 
panions, in obedience to their masters, by w^hom 
their orio-inal connections had been severed ! 

Eights of conscience require, and therefore au- 



254 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

ihorize a man. to cTioose liis own place of worship, 
and not "forsake the assembling together;" nay, to 
choose and follow the avocation, and select the resi- 
dence and the associates where, in his own judgment, 
he can best serve God, fit his own soul for heaven, 
and lead his fellow-men to the Saviour. It com- 
mands and authorizes him to "search the Scrip- 
tures," and train up his family "in the nurture and 
admonition of the Lord." The master emancipates 
his slave, and ceases to be his "owner" when he 
fully accords to him, in practice and in theory, these 
Heaven-conferred rights. It is useless to attempt 
evading this, by adducing the case of children and 
minors. The slave, at maturity, is entitled to the 
rights and responsibilities of a ma7i, and without 
them he is despoiled of his religious rights. 

The slave master may withhold education and the 
Bible ; he may forbid religious instruction, and access 
to public worship. He may enforce upon the slave 
and his family a religious worship and a religious 
teaching which he disapproves. In all this, as com- 
pletel}^ as in secular matters, he is " entirely subject 
to the will of a master, to whom he helongsy The 
claim of chattelhood extends to the soul as well as 
to the bodv, for the body cannot be otherwise held 
and controlled. 

There is no other religious despotism on the face 
of the earth so absolute, so irresponsible, so soul- 
crushing as this. It is not subjection to an eccle- 
siastical body or functionary of any description ; a 
presbytery, a conference, a bishop, a prelate, a pope, 



SPIRITUAL DESPOTISM. 255 

who may be supposed to be sensible, in some sort, 
of their sacred and responsible charge ! The free 
white American exults in his exemption from the 
jurisdiction of these, except during his own free con- 
sent. He would freely part with his life's blood, in 
martyrdom or in war, rather than relinquish or com- 
promise this right ! But he thinks it a light matter 
(if he thinks of it at all) that three millions of his 
countrymen are in a worse spiritual thraldom than 
this, under bishops that regard and treat them as 
"chattels personal !" a bishopric entailed by descent, 
or conferred by the hammer of the auctioneer, the 
writ of the sheriff, or the chances of the bilhard- 
table, and transferable in the same manner! nay, 
exercised by deputation every day, by the brutal 
overseer, the ignorant housekeeper, the spoiled 
child ; a bishopric, Christian or infidel, drunken or 
sober, chaste or lewd, as the chances may happen ! 
Who thinks of it, that the religious rights of immor- 
tal men are thus trampled in the dust in this country; 
that their religions privileges are in such keeping? 
How is it that Christian ministers, " sons of the 
Pilgrims," can overlook all this, as they do, when 
they speak of the "innocent legal relation" that 
involves, of necessity, all this ? The absolute power 
of the Pope, though conferred, as it once Avas, by 
the almost unanimous consent of all Christendom, 
they can denounce as "the Antichrist," forgetful 
of the more absolute power of every " owner" of an 
American slave! The doom of the former they 
read in the Apocalypse ; the latter they deem Heaven- 



256 THE AMERIC.A:^r SLAVE CODE. 

sanctioned and approved, blaming only its abuse! 
Why may not Papal power have the benefit of the 
same apology ? Whence comes it that the absolute 
religious despotism (for such it is) of the slave owner 
is so much more sacred and unapproachable than 
that of the Protestant or Catholic Church ? 

A single incident — we hope it is an uncommon 
one — will illustrate this absolute power of the slave- 
holder. At a planter's dinner-table, one day, (per- 
haps over the wine,) a guest remarked upon the 
hypocrisy of all religious slaves. The planter dis- 
sented. He was the owner of one who would rather 
die than deny his Kedecmer. This 'was ridiculed. 
The slave was brought and jDut to the test. He was 
ordered to deny his belief in the Lord Jesus Christ. 
He refused ; was terribly whipped ; retained his in- 
tegrity ; the whipping was repeated, and " he died 
in consequence of this severe infliction." This was 
in South Carolina. The facts were related to Miss 
Sarah M. Grimke, daughter of Judge Grimke, of 
Charleston, by an intimate friend, the wife of a slave- 
holder. The particulars, over the signature of Miss 
Grimke, are inserted in Weld's "Slavery as it is," 
p. 24. 

There is no adequate legal 'protection against such 
outrages, nor can there be, consistently with the 
"legal relation" of slave ownership. There was 
probably no legal investigation of this case. If 
there had been, and if "white" -witnesses had at- 
tested the fact, the verdict, in conformity with the 
laAvs of the State, would probably have been, '-'■death 



SPIRITUAL DESPOTISM. 257 

hy moderate correction /" Into the causes or reasons 
of chastisement, the Slave Code does not inquire ! 
It is sufficient that the slaye disobei/s his "owner," 
"overseer, or agent !" 

"We have made no quotations from the statutes or 
judicial decisions of the slave States, on the subject 
of this chapter directly, because ice have found none! 
Neither Stroud nor Wheeler, nor any other compiler 
of slave laws and decisions that we know of, appear 
to have discovered any provisions for the education 
and religious liberties of slaves ! The eloquent 
silence of these significant blanks in the statute 
book and judicial reports of the slave States, is 
sufficient to certify the facts of the* case. TVhoever 
has read the preceding enactments and decisions 
well knows how to interpret such silence. 



CHAPTER XXm. 

ORIGIX OF THE " EELATIOX/' AND ITS SUBJECTS. 

The so-called " legal relation " of slave ownership of Negroes originated in that 
African Slave-Trade which our laws now punish as piracy ; but Slavery is, 
in general, extended over all classes whom the slaveholders have been able to 
seize upon and retain ; over Indians, free persons of color, and whites. 

Sir John Hawkins obtained leave of Queen 
Elizabeth, in the year 1562, to transport Africans 
into tlie American Colonies ivith their own free con- 
sent, a condition witli whicli be promised to comply. 
But be forfeited bis word, and forced them on board 
bis sbips by acts of devastation and slaugbter. For 
tbis be was denominated a murderer and a robber, 
even by the bistorian Edwards, an advocate of the 
slave-trade. (Yide Clarkson's History, p. 30 ; and 
Edwards' Hist. W. Indies, vol. 2, pp. 43^.) Tbis 
was tbe beginning of tbe slave-trade by Englisbmen. 

By Act of 23 George II., tbe "trade to Africa" 
was " regulated," including a strict probibition, under 
penalties, of tbe taking on board or carr^-ing away 
an}^ African "t?/ force, fraud, or violen^!^.'''' (Yide 
Clarkson, p. 314. See also Spooner's Unconstitu- 
tionality of Slavery.) 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 259 

Under no other legal sanction than this, the forcible 
and fraudulent seizure and transportation of slaves 
from Africa to the British- American Colonies was 
carried on till the West India and North American 
Colonies were stocked with slaves, and many were 
introduced into England, held as slaves there, and 
the tenure accounted legal! 

But in 1772 it was decided by Lord Mansfield, in 
the case of James Somerset, a slave, that the whole 
process and tenure were illegal; that there was not, 
and never had been, any legal slavery in England. 
This decision was understood by Granville Sharpe, 
the chief agent in procuring it, to be applicable to 
the British Colonies, as well as to the mother-country, 
and undoubtedly it was so. The United States were 
then Colonies of Great Britain. But the slaves in 
the Colonies had no Granville Sharpe to bring their 
cause into the Courts, and the Courts were composed 
of slaveholders. 

In the great struggle, afterwards, in the British 
Parliament for abolishing the African slave-trade, 
William Pitt cited the Act of 23 George II., (which 
we have already mentioned,) and declared that in- 
stead of authorizing the slave-trade, as was pre- 
tended, it was a direct prohibition of the whole 
process, as it had actually been carried on by fraud, 
force, and violence. An elaborate investigation by 
Parliament sustained the statement; and, after a 
long struggle, the doctrine prevailed, and the traffic 
was expressly and solemnly abolished, though it has 
been secretly carried on to the present day, and is 



260 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

prosecuted still. There is reason to believe tliat 
great numbers are still smuggled annually into the 
United States, as it is known that numerous plan- 
tations in the States bordering on the Gulf of 
Mexico are stocked with slaves, evidently African, 
and unable to speak English.* The ichole process is, 
and has been, illegal^ from beginning to end. 

The first introduction of slaves into Georgia was 
in direct violation of express statutes of the Colony 
itself, until slaveholders gained the ascendency and 
repealed the laws. Into the other Colonies slaves 
were introduced a long time before there were any 
colonial enactments authorizing it, and consequently 
without any shoAV of legal sanction. When statutes 
icere enacted, they did not pretend to create or ori- 
ginate the relation. Nor did they define, with ex- 
actness, who were slaves and who were not slaves. 
They only assumed or took for granted the existence 

* See Weld's Slavery as it is, (p. 139, <tc.,) for important facts on 
this subject, among which are the following : The President's Mes- 
sage, in 1837, stated that a naval force had been employed in pre- 
venting the importation of slaves. Mr. ;Middleton, of South Carolina, 
in 1819, declared, in a speech in Congress, that "thirteen tJiousavd 
Africans are annually smuggled into the Southern States." Mr. 
Merct-r, of Virginia, in a speech in Congress, declared that " car- 
goes " of African slaves were smuggled into the South, to a de- 
plorable extent Mr. "Wright, of Maryland, iu a speech in Congress, 
estimated the "number imported annually at fifteen thousand." 
Particulars are also given of the importation of a cargo of five hun- 
dred from Guinea and Congo, into Savannah, the capture, the sham 
tiial of the importers, their acquittal, aqd the distribution of the 
slaves among the planters! Xew-Orleans papers, in 1839, recorded 
the fact of frequent and extensive smuggling. 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 261 

of slave property, and made laws for its security and 
regulation. The consequence is, that no slaveholder 
can now prove that the particular slaves claimed by 
him were ever made slaves accordincj to laiL\ or that 
their ancestors were thus enslaved ! And there are no 
statute laws in either of the States, by which it can 
be legally proved by the common rules and usages 
of Courts, as applied to other subjects, that slavery 
legally exists there. This was avowed by Mr. Mason, 
of Virginia, in the Senate of the United States, when 
the Fugitive Slave Bill was pending. He objected to 
the proposed " trial by jury " that it would bring up 
the question of the legality of slavery in the States, 
which, said he, it ivould he impossible to prove. Mr. 
Bayly, member of Congress from Virginia, took the 
same ground. So Congress struck out the jury trial, 
because slaveholders avowed their inability to prove 
the legahty of slavery in a Court of law ! 

It may be proper to explain, that while these gen- 
tlemen admit that there are no express statutes of 
the States that are adequate to the legalization of 
slavery, they nevertheless affect to believe that it is 
legalized by the common laiv ! It is not strange that 
they are unwilling to go with that plea into the 
Courts! The Courts of Louisiana, Mississippi, and 
Kentucky have abeady set it aside. (See the case of 
Marie Louise vs. Mariott et al.. May Term, 1836 ; 8 
Louisiana Reports, 475. "Wheeler's Law of Slavery, 
o48-9. Also, same principle in Rankin vs. Lydia, 
Fall Term, 1820 ; 2 Marshall's Kentucky Rep., 467. 
Wheeler, p. 339. Also in Lunsford vs. Coquillon, 



262 THE AMERIG-AJN' SLAVE CODE. 

May Term, 1824 ; 14 Martin's Louisiana Eep., 401. 
"Wheeler, p. 335. See also Harvy and others vs. 
Decker and Hopkins, June Term, 1818 ; Walker's 
Miss. Eep., 36. Wheeler, pp. 340-6. See also Com- 
monwealth of Massachusetts vs. Thomas Aves, Aug., 
1836. Wheeler, p. 368, and Story's Conflict of 
Laws, 92-9 7.) ■• 

All these affirm that slavery, being without foun- 
dation in nature, is the creature of municipal law, 
and exists only under its jurisdiction. In the case 
first mentioned, (Marie Louise vs. Mariott et al.,) 
in which the slave had been taken to France by 
her master, and brought back to Louisiana, Judge 
Matthews said : " Being free for one movient in 
France, it was not in the power of her former oicner to 
reduce her again to slavery.^^ (Wheeler, p. 349.) 

The absence, therefore, of municipal law, is fatal 
to the legality of the claims of the slaveholder, even 
by the Slave Code. In the case of Lunsford vs. 
Coquillon, above mentioned, Judge Martin said : 
"7'Ae relation of oiuner and slave is, in the States of 
this Union in which it has a LEGAL existence, the creature 
of municipal law.'''' (Wheeler, p. 335.) 

In Wheeler's Law of Slavery, pp. 8-11, there is a 
brief account of the origin of slavery, which in no 
essential particular conflicts with the account we 
have here given of it, and in some of the most im- 

* "While these statements -were in the hands of the printer, a 
gentleman of the city of New-York, who, for several years, was 
a practising lawj-er in Georgia, informed the author that there 
hn<^ >^°on similar judicial decisions in that State. 



ITS ORIGIISr AND SUBJECTS. 263 

portant particulars is coincident "witli it. The same 
remarks will apply to the statements cited from 
Judge Matthews, of Louisiana, pp. 15, 16. 

"It is an admitted principle, that slavery has been 
permitted and tolerated in all the colonies established 
in America by the mother-country. Not only of 
Africans, but also of Indians. No legislative act 

OF THE COLONIES CAN BE FOUND IN RELATION TO 

IT." (Wheeler, pp. 8, 9.) 

In other words, the practice had no municipal law 
to sanction it. It was barely " tolerated f that is, it 
was not suppressed. This is a very different thing 
from saying that it was LEGAL, which could not be 
without local enactment, even according to the 
lowest definition of legality. No lawyer ever speaks 
of the holding of property in horses (which is a 
natural right) as being " tolerated P^ Again, 

" Hudgins vs. Wright, Nov. T., 1806 ; 1 Hen. and 
Munf , Ya. Eep., 139. 

" Per Cur. : The slavery of the African negro has 
existed from the time of bringing them into the 
Colon}^. In many of the States express enactments 
have been made declaring them slaves, and in others 
they are slaves hy CUSTOM," (Wheeler, p. 12.) 

It would have been interestinsf to have learned* 
from the Court in v:hich of the colonies, and ivhen 
and how " express enactments" were made. It would 
then have confirmed fully the statement before 
quoted, that " no legislative enactments" originating 
slavery can be found. Again, 

In the case of Seville vs. Chretien, Sept. T., 1817 ; 



264 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

6 Martin's Louisiana Eeports, 275, Judge Matthews 
admits, and labors to account for, ^^ the absence of any 
legislative act of European 'powers for the introduction of 
slavery iiito their American dominions.''^ (Wheeler, p. 15.) 

So that American slavery owes its origin neither 
to American nor European legislation. The Courts, 
indeed, whenever they approach the subject, appear 
to be perplexed with the problem of its legal origin. 
As for example, 

Hall vs. Mullen, June T., 1821 ; 5 Har. and John's 
Md. Eep., 190. — Judge Johnson said : " But the con- 
dition and rights of slaves in this State depend not 
exclusively either on the civil or feudal law, but 
may ^ perhaps, rest in part on both; subject, never- 
theless, to such changes in their condition," &c., " as 
the laws of the State may prescribe." (Wheeler, pj). 
10, 11.) 

By what authority, when, and how, the feudal law 
or the Eoman civil law became established in the 
American States, we are not informed ; nor is it very 
important, since the Courts at the South will be care- 
ful not to allow the feudal laAV to define slavery, as 
indeed appears by the preceding. 

Whence, then, is the original of slavery? And 
.how does it appear to have been or to be legalized? 
In the case of 

Ilarvcy and others vs. Decker and Hopkins, June 
T., Walker's Miss. Eep., 36, the Court said : ^^ Slavery 
is condemned by reason and the laivs of nature. It ex- 
ists, and can ONLY exist, through municipal regula- 
Hons:' (Wheeler, pp. 340-6.) 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 265 

But tlic " municipal regulations" (so far as origin- 
ating the " legal relation" is concerned) appear, as 
has been seen, to be missing! They "cannot be 
found" on the statute book ! 

The New-Jersey Judge who frankly confessed that 
he could not tell and did not care how the legal right 
to enslave the Indians originated, took the most 
prudent course, and should be imitated by all pro- 
slavery Judges who are so unfortunate as to stumble 
upon " the delicate question" of the origin of legal- 
ized negro slaA'ery. 

" The State vs. Waggoner, April T., 1797 ; 1 Hal- 
stead's K J. Eep., 374^76. 

" They" [Indians] " have so long been recognized 
as slaves in our law, that it would be as great a vio- 
lation of the rights of property to establish a contrary 
decision at the present day, as it would in the case 
of the Africans, and as useless to investigate the 
manner in which they originally lost their freedom." 
(Wheeler, p. 18.) 

And yet, in Wheeler's Law of Slavery, we find 
cases in Avhich even Southern Judges (to their honor 
be it recorded) have awarded freedom to persons 
enslaved, upon the opposite principle, that "prescrip- 
tion is never pleadable to a claim of freedom." This 
is the marginal note to the case of 

" Delphene vs. Devise, 1-1 Martin's Louisiana Eep. 
650: 

"Per Cur., Porter, J. : The plaintiff urges she is de- 
scended from one Marie Catherene, a negro woman 
now deceased, who was the slave of a certain Marie 
12 



266 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Durse, and that the said Marie emancipated and set 
free Catherene and her children, Florence, Luce, and 
Catherene, the mother of the petitioner," " The de- 
fendant pleaded the general issue, and j^rescnption. 
We shall, before entering upon the merits, dispose 
of the exception which forms the second ground of 
defense in the defendant's answer. We do so by 
referring to the third partida, title twenty-nine, law 
twenty-four, in which we find it provided that, if a 
raanhe FREE, no "matter how long he may have been HELD 
by another AS A slave, his state or condition cannot 
he thereby changed^ nor can he he reduced to slavery in 
any manner ichatever, on account of THE time he may 
have heen held inservitudey " The plaintiff is entitled 
to her freedom." (Wheeler, p. 101.) 

Same principle in case of Metaj^er vs. Metayer, 
Jan. T., 1819 ; 6 Martin's Louisiana Rep. 16. (Wheel- 
er, p. 103.) Also in Vaughan vs. Phebe, Jan. T., 
1827 ; Martin and Yerger's Tenn. Eep. 1. (Wheeler, 
pp. 395— 401.) Judge Crabb said: ^'The act of limit- 
ations luould he no har.''^ (p. 399.) 

Neither by statute, therefore, nor by the common 
law, nor yai by prescription, are the negroes in Ame- 
rica legally held in bondaoe. 

But it is thne now, in further confirmation of this, 
to cite more fully the language held by Judge 
^NLatthews, of Louisiana, in the case of Seville vs. 
Chretien, before mentioned. 

Having alluded to " the absence of any legislative act 
of the European powers for the introduction of slavery 
into their American dominions, Judge Matthews adds : 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 267 

"7/" the record of any such act exists, xoe have not heen 
able to find any trace of it. It is true that Charles the 
Fifth, in the first part of the sixteenth century, 
granted a patent to one of his Flemish subjects for 
the privilege of importing four thousand negroes 
into America, which was purchased by some Genoese 
merchants, who were the first who brought into any 
regular form the commerce for slaves between Africa 
and America. A few years before, a small number 
of negroes had been introduced by order of Ferdi- 
nand. But the privilege granted by the Emperor, so 
far from being the first introduction of slavery into 
the New World, ivas intended as a means of enabling 
tJie 'planters to dispense with the slavery of the Indians 
hy their European conquerors. A full account of 
these transactions may be seen in Eobertson's His- 
tory of America." (Wheeler, p. 15.) 

It will not, probably, be contended that the en- 
slavement of the Indians, here mentioned, was under 
sanction of law. But let us hear Judge Matthews 
further : 

"On turning our attention to the first settlement 
of the British Colonies in America, we find that the 
introduction of negro slaves into one of the most 
important, was accidental. In the year 1616, as 
stated by Robertson, and 1620 by Judge Marshall, 
in his Life of Washington, a Dutch ship from the 
coast of Guinea sold a part of her cargo of negroes to 
the planters on James River. This is the first origin 
of the slavery of the blacks in the British- American 
provinces. About twenty years after, slaves tvere intro- 



268 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

duced into Nsw- England, and it is believed that Indians 
were at the same time, or hefore, held in bondage. The 

ABSENCE OF ANY ACT OR INSTRUMENT OF GOVERN- 
MENT UNDER WHICH THEIR SLAVERY ORIGINATED IS 
NOT A MATTER OF GREATER SLUFltlSE THAN THAT 
THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NONE FOUND 

AUTHORIZING THE SLAVERY OF THE 
BLACKS. The first Act of the Legislature of the Pro- 
vince of Virginia on tlie subject of the slavery of the In- 
dians luas passed in 1670, and one of its provisions, 
according to Judge Tucker, prohibits free or manu- 
mitted Indians from purchasing Christian servants. 
The words free or manumitted are useless and absurd, 
if there did not exist Indians who had been slaves 
and had been manumitted, before and at the time 
this Act was passed." (Wheeler, pp. 15, 16.) 

Thus fidl and explicit is the testimony of Judge 
]\Iatthews, of Louisiana, (and in the very act of mak- 
ing a decision against the claims of an Indian " to 
recover his liberty,") to the fact that both Indians 
and negroes were originally enslaved in this country, 
in the absence of either European or colonial legisla- 
tion to sanction or create the relation of owner and 
slave. 

Put this by the side of the Southern decisions, be- 
fore cited, that slavery can have no legal existence 
in the absence of municipal law, and we have the 
result that slavery in this country had no legal origin, 
and has continued to exist without law ; since (by 
the same testimony) " no legislative act of the Colo- 
nics can be found in relation to it." 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 269 

The reader may be curious to know on tvhat 
ground Judge Matthews, of Louisiana, in the case 
already cited, could maintain the legality of Ameri- 
can slavery. It is this : 

" However, tve are of opinion that it may he laid 
down as a legal axiom, that in all governments in 
which the municipal regulations are not absolutely 
opposed to slavery, persons already reduced to that 
state may be held in it ; and we also assume it as a 
first principle that slavery has been permitted and 
tolerated in all the colonies established in America by 
European powers, most clearly as relates to the 
blacks and Africans, and also in relation to Indians, 
in the first periods of conquest and colonization." 
(Wheeler, p. 15.) 

According to this " legal axiom," any person in a 
State where there are no express statutes forbidding 
slavery, (as perhaps in Massachusetts and Maine,) 
may seize aiiy other person and enslave him ! And 
having done this, he may continue to "hold" him 
legally^ because the laws have not forbidden it ! By 
the same or a similar "legal axiom," it would follow 
that in a State where no express statutes had been 
enacted against such minor injuries as assault, bat- 
tery, and maiming, such practices might be consid- 
ered legal ! Thus the " axiom" ignores the existence 
of natural law and common law ! 

Another important circumstance is, that the 
colonial charters, which were their constitutions of 
government, expressly provided that the Colonies 
should enact no laws contrary to the common law, 



270 THE A^ilERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

the Constitution and the fundamental laws of Great 
Britain. But these (as decided by Lord Mansfield, 
and as attested by Coke, Fortescue, and Blackstone) 
are incompatible with the existence of slavery. 

Another fact is, that the thirteen United States, on 
the fourth of July, 1776, declared that " all men are 
created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with 
certain inalienable rights, among which are life, 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," Similar 
declarations were incorporated into the original 
Constitutions of the several States, and the Courts in 
Massachusetts decided that this was equivalent to an 
act abolishing slavery.''^ 

Such was the origin^ and such are the legal founda- 
tions of the " legal relation of master and slave" in 
this countr}-; just as "legal" now, and no more so — 

* Tlie historical facts hastily hinted at in this chapter, are de- 
tailed at length in Goodell's "History of Slavery and Anti-slavery." 
Since that work was issued, and since this book has been in the 
hands of the printer, the author has received additional informa- 
tion from John Scoble, late Secretary of the British and Foreign 
Anti-slavery Society, London. In consequence of atrocities com- 
mitted by a West India slaveholder of eminence, a legal investiga- 
tion took place, which resulted in the discovery and announcement 
that there was no legalized slavery in the British Ci'lonies. This 
was made public in England previous to the Act of Parliament 
terminating the practice of slaveholding. The Act, accordingly, 
does not repeal or assume to repeal any existing laws, either 
colonial or British. It only provides for the suppresson of an 
unlawful custom or practice. Intelligent Englishmen do not now 
speak of British "West Indian slavery as liaving ever been legal. 
This accords with the maxim of James Madison and of Lord 
Brougham that man cannot hold property in man. 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS, 271 

just as "innocent" now, and no more so, than in 
the person of John Hawkins, Avhen lie first forced a 
band of nalvcd Africans on board his slave-ship, on 
the coast of Africa, or when he first offered them for 
sale in the Colonies ; quite as cruel, Ileavcn-defjing, 
and murderous now as it was then^ and involving its 
present perpetrators in the same condemnation with 
John Hawkins, at the bar of an impartial posterity, 
and at the bar of God. " Where the foundation is 
weak," saj^s the common law, " the structure falls." 
"What is invalid from the heginning^ cannot be 
made valid by length of time." (Noyes' Maxims.) 
"He that stealeth a man and selleth him," says 
Moses, "or if he be found in his hand, he shall 
surely be put to death." " The law was made for 
men-stealers," says Paul. " Stealers of men," said 
the Presbyterian General Assembly of 1794, " are 
those who bring off slaves or freemen, and keep^ sell, 
or buy them." "Those are man-stealers," says Gro- 
tius, " who abduct, heep^ sell, or buy slaves or free- 
men." " To hold a man in a state of slavery," said 
Dr. Jonathan Edwards, "is to be, every day ^ g^^ilty 
of robbing him of his liberty, or of man-stealing J^ 
" Men-buyers," said John Wesley, " are exactly on a 
level with men-stealers." We might quote similar 
language from Dr. Porteus, Bishop of London, Bishop 
Warburton, Macknight, Abraham Booth, and other 
eminent writers. 

This is the pretended "legal relation" of master 
and slave in America. Let us now see who are its 
subjects. 



272 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

1. Tlie descendants of all who were stolen by John 
Hawkins and others on the coast of Africa ! The 
law of hereditary slavery, as defended by Henry 
Clay and Mr. Gholson, and as practised by the entire 
community of slaveholders, identifies their slavehold- 
ing with the slaveholding of Jolin Ilawlcins^ and 
bases their claim of property iipon his ! If this is 
not so, then they are guilty of commencing the 
process de novo, and of kidnapping the innocent, 
helpless infant "upon their own hook!" This is 
called being " born to a slave inheritance !" This is 
the "innocent legal relation!" The slave laAV 
enables the heir to seize upon the slaves of his 
father or their offsj^ring ; and he is under the un- 
fortunate necessity of seizing upon all -w-ithin his 
grasp — not unfrequently his own father^s daughters 
and sons ! Were they his own mother'' s daughters 
and sons too, and if he had the power, it would be 
the same thing ! Equally " legal " — equally " inno- 
cent!" 

And here is the evidence : 

Hudgins vs. Wrights, Nov. T., 1806; 1 Hen. and 
Munf , Va. Hep., 13i. Per Cur., Tucker, J. : " From 
the first settlement of the colony of Virginia to the 
year 1788, October Session, all negroes. Moors, and 
mulattoes, except Turks and Moors in amity with 
Great Britain, brought into this country, by sea or 
land, were slaves ; and, by the uniform declaration 
of our laws, the descendants of females remain slaves 
to this day, unless they can prove a right to freedom 
by actual emancipation, or bv descent in maternal 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 273 

nal line from an emancipated slave." (Wheeler, 
p. 3.) 

Hudgins vs. Wrights, (same case.) " Held by tlie 
Court, Green, J., that, to solve all doubts, the Act 
of 1662 was passed, which declared that all children 
born in this country shall be bond or free, according 
to the condition of the mother. It is the rule of the 
civil law. By that law the state of the child was 
determined by that of the mother at the time of its 
birth." (lb., p. 3.) " The rule is universally fol- 
lowed." (lb., p. 3-i.) 

" The code of the civil law prevails in all the 
States," (says Mr. Wheeler, in a note on the preced- 
ing,) " and in many of them, statutes have been 
enacted on the subject." (lb. See also Stroud's 
Sketch, p. 11.) 

By Act of Maryland, 1663, chap. 30, we are in- 
formed (in the preamble) that " divers free-born 
English women," &c., "do intermarry with negro 
slaves, by which also divers suits may arise touching 
the issue of such women," &c. ; whereuj)on it was 
enacted that, in such cases, the ivomcm shall also 
serve the master of her husband during his life, and 
their children "shall he slaves, as their FATHERS were.^^ 
But in 1770 this law was repealed, and it was enacted 
that the child should follow the condition of the 
mother instead of the father. (Stroud's Sketch, pp. 
8-10.) 

As mulattoes, with few exceptions, were the off- 
spring of white fathers by slave mothers, this law, 
as ivas intended, secured to the father the right of 
12* 



274 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

ownership over liis own cliildren — a very common 
and extensive manifestation of " the innocent legal 
relation." As this law obtains in all the slave States, 
a large and increasing proportion of the slaves are 
held in slavery under its operation. K the child 
followed the condition of the father^ the system 
would rapidly run itself out. 

2. Free people of color mayhQ and continually are 
brought into slavery, in this country, in a variety of 
ways. Some of these ways have been already spe- 
cified, incidentally, while treating of other topics. 
Some will be specified hereafter. And they will be 
clustered together and adverted to again, in a chapter 
on " The Liberties of the Free People of Color." In 
the mean time, the topic demands attention here, in 
our inquiry concerning the suhjeds of slaver i/, and we 
shall cite some particulars which need not be repeated 
again. 

The general fact of the enslavement of the free 
colored people, of the facility with Avhich it is done, 
and of the indifierence, not to say the connivance^ of 
the Southern Courts, will appear from the following: 

Davis vs. Sandford, Spring Term, 1815 ; 6 Littell's 
Ky. Rep., 206. 

"The appellant sold to the appellee a slave. 
The deed of bargain and warranty certified that the 
negro was horn a slave. It appeared that the negro 
had been in Ohio, and had, by the Courts of that 
State, been declared free, ivliich fact teas known to 
hath 'parties — ^the seller alleging that the judgment 
declaring the slave free had no force or efiect upon 



ITS ORIGIN AJSTD SUBJECTS. 276 

his rights, as lie was not made a -partj. The Court, 
Ch. J. Boyle, held that the warranty was not broken, 
it not being alleged or proved that the negro was not 
born a slave ; and the jadice of the case was with 
the seller — the hnjev purchasing with a knowledge 
of all the facts, which was properly shown by parol 
evidence." (Wheeler, p. 121.) 

But we must proceed to classify some of the prin- 
cipal methods of reducing free people of color to 
slavery. 

(a) Slaves made free by the voluntary act of their 
masters may be re-enslaved in various ways. A 
failure of conformity, in every minute particular, to 
the enactments regulating emancipations, (however 
vexatious and unreasonable,) will work the forfeiture 
of liberty to the emancipated. 

In cases where infant children of slaves were made 
free by the will of their " owners," but inadvertently 
the i^ecise time of their becoming free failed to be 
specified, such "shall be esteemed slaves for lifef 
(Maryland Laws, Act of 1809, chap. 71. Stroud's 
Sketch, p. 151. See chapter on Legislative and Ju- 
dicial Obstructions to Emancipation.) 

(/>) A full and exact comphance with the legal 
regulations, in emancipating slaves, does not always 
secure their freedom. The Legislature of North 
Carolina set aside the decisions of the Courts, and 
re-enslaved large numbers who had been legally set 
free. (See chapter just mentioned.) 

In Virginia, "if any emancipated slave (infants 
excepted) shall remain in the State more than 



276 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

twelve montlis after his or lier right to freedom 
shall have accrued, he or she shall forftit all such 
right, and may be apprehended and sold by the over- 
seers of the poor, &c., for the benefit of the Literary 
Fund ! ! !" (1 Revised Code of 1819, 436.) 

President Jefferson, in his will, having emanci- 
pated five of his slaves, adds: " I humbly and earn- 
estly request of the Legislature of Virginia a confirm- 
ation of the bequests to these servants, with leave to 
remain in the State, where their families and con- 
nections are," &c. 

(c) Colored persons who cannot prove their free- 
dom may be enslaved. In Mississippi, " every negro 
or mulatto found within the State, and not having the 
ahility to show himself entitled to freedom, may be 
sold, by order of the Court, as a slave." (Mississippi 
Eevised Code, 389.) And no negro or mulatto can 
be a witness to prove his freedom ! 

In North Carolina, by decision of the Courts, this 
rule is limited to negroes^ and the mixed race is ex- 
empted. It is by this unrighteous i^resumption against 
color that suspected fugitives, though unclaimed, are 
sold for the payment of their jail fees in AVashington 
Cit}'. In South Carolina, by Act of 1740, the doc- 
trine is affirmed, both in respect to negroes and the 
mixed races. The same in Georgia by Act of 1770. 
Also in Mississippi, Revised Code, 389. In Virginia, 
there is no statute, but the Courts have affirmed the 
doctrine, except where Indians or ivhite persons are 
claimed as slaves. (See Stroud's Sketch, p. 19; also, 
pp. 76-88, inckidiug Notes.) 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 277 

^^Every negro is 2'>resumed to he a slave.'' — " This is 
tlie general doctrine in all the States, and the appli- 
cation of a different rule is only in cases where the 
person is a mulatto, or some other grade approx- 
imating to a white person." (Wheeler, p. 5.) 

''Or person of colore — "CbZor and long possession 
are such presumptive evidence of slavery as to throw 
the burden of proof on the party claiming his free- 
dom." (lb., pp. 5, 6 ; case of Davis, a man of color, 
vs. Curry, Fall T., 1810 ; 2 Bibb's Ky. Rep., 238.) 

And who is a "person of color?" 

*' AVhen there is a distinct and visible admixture 
of African blood, the person is to be denominated a 
mulatto, or person of color." (State vs. Davis and 
Hanna, Dec. T., 1831 ; 2 Bailey's S. C. Rep., 558. 
Wheeler, p. 4.) 

And the fact of color " may be known by inspec- 
tion." (Wheeler, p. 5 ; also p. 22.) 

{d) Free negroes may be enslaved for "entertain- 
ing" a runaway slave, and for nonpayment of the 
fine thus incurred ! (See law of South Carolina be- 
fore cited, and the consequent sentence of the Court 
of Charleston in the case of "Hannah Elliott, a free 
black woman, with her daughter Judy, and sons 
Simon and Sam." Stroud's Sketch, pp. 16, 17.) 

(e) Also, for selling or giving away to a slave their 
certificates of freedom, as before mentioned. (Laws 
of Maryland, 1796, chap. 67, sect. 18. Snethen's 
Dist. Col., pp. 28-9.) 

(/) Also, free negroes and mulattoes, arrested on 
suspicion of being fugitives, but not claimed by any 



278 THE AMERICAN SK.\.VE CODE. 

one, and unable to pay their jail fees, are sold by tlie 
sheriff! (Jay's Inquiry, p. 154, and Jay's Yiew, p. 
33, &c.) 

(g) " Where a zchife woman intermarries with a 
slave, the issue are slaves; though the Act subjecting 
such issue to slavery was repealed, if the marriage 
took place before the repeal of the Act." (Butler 
vs. Boardman, Sept. T., 1770 ; 1 Har. and M'Hen. 
Md. Rep., 371. Wheeler, p. 21.) 

{h) "The issue of slaves entitled to liberty at a 
future day, if born before the day, are slaves." (Maria 
vs. Surbaugh, Feb. T., 1824 ; 2 Rand's Ya. Rep., and 
other cases. Wheeler, p. 32.) 

(i) " Children born during a qualified manumission 
of their mothers, are born slaves." (McCutchen et al. 
vs. Marshall et al., Jan. T. ; 8 Peters' U. S. Rep., 
220, and another case. Wheeler, p. 35.) 

(j) Intermarriages with whites are punished by 
enslavement. (Maryland, Act of 1717, chap. 13, 
sect. 5.) " If any free negro or mulatto intermarry 
with any ivhite woman ; or if an}^ zvhite man shall in- 
termarr}^ with any negro or mulatto woman, such 
negro or mulatto shall become a slave during life, 
except mulattoes born of white women, kc, who 
shall become servants for seven years." (Stroud, p. 
19.) For "a white man" to live in adulterous con- 
cubinage with his slave woman, incurs no penalty 
at all. Adulterers are entitled Honorable, but mar- 
riage is punished by the Judge ! 

{k) Innumerable free persons of color are kidnap- 
ped and sold by the operation of the laws excluding 



ITS ORIGIN AND SUBJECTS. 279 

colored witnesses, and forbidding colored persons to 
resist ivhite persons. In Philadelphia, within two years, 
more than thirty persons, mostly children, known to he 
free, Avere kidnapped and carried away, and only 
five of them, with great difficulty and expense, were 
reclaimed. (Stroud's Sketch, p. 74.) 

This process of kidnapping is facilitated by the 
fact that such vast numbers of slaves are carried 
from State to State, not only by the removal of 
"owners," but by the inter-State slave-trade. The 
kidnapper of free colored persons readily passes for 
a remoA^ng owner, or for a dealer in slaves ; and, in 
fact, many of the dealers are themselves kidnappers 
of free negroes and mulattoes. Persons ostensibly 
or in reality employed to arrest fugitives are known 
frequently to practise the same villany even in the 
free States, and under this cover they are generally 
secure. The colored person seized cannot testify in 
a slave State, and no colored person can testify for 
him. At the South, very few white persons would 
pay the least attention to their protestations of being 
free. It would seldom or never embarrass the auc- 
tioneer, or diminish the number and amount of the 
bids. This is evident from the fact that " hundreds 
of advertisements in the Southern ^^apers" of sales 
of negroes at auction, and of runaways, describe them 
as claiming to he free! See "Weld's " Slavery as it 
is," pp. 162-3, where specimens of such advertise- 
ments may be found, one of them describing a negro 
'■'•ivho ivas originally from Keio-Yorhy 

{I) Free people of color, by passing out of a free 



280 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

State into a slave State, (where by the Federal Con- 
stitution tliey are entitled to all the rights of free 
citizens,) incur penalties of fines for so doing, which, 
if unable to pay, they may be enslaved! (Jay's In- 
quiry, p. 24. See chapter on "Liberties of Free 
People of Color.") 

{m) Negroes unlawfully imported from Africa are 
enslaved, not only when clandestinely smuggled, 
(which is done to a great extent,) but, strange to 
tell, when brought into port by capture of naval 
officers ! A case occurring at Savannah, and before 
alluded to, is narrated circumstantially in Weld's 
" Slavery as it is," pp. 139^0. So openly and sys- 
tematically has this been done, that the States of 
Louisiana, Georgia, and Alabama, have enacted sta- 
tutes for the express purpose of having the slaves 
sold for the benefit of the State Treasury ! A law 
of Congress, conferring power on the State Legisla- 
tures to dispose of the slaves illegally imported, was 
not repealed until 1819. And the law of Alabama 
(of 1823) is still more recent, and in open defiance 
of the laws of the United States abolishing the Afri- 
can slave-trade! (See Stroud's Sketch, pp. 158- 
164.) 

And the Courts have accordingly laid down the 
principle, that " a slave does not become free on his 
being illegally imported into the State." Such is 
the marginal note to the case of "Gomez vs. Bon- 
neval, June T., 1819 ; 6 Martin's Lou. Eep. Q>b(d.— 
Per Cur., Derhigmj, J. : The petitioner is a negro in 
actual state of slavery : he claims his freedom, and 



ITS ORIGL"^ AND SUBJECTS. 281 

is hound to prove it. In liis attempt, however, to 
prove that lie was free before lie was introduced 
into this country, he has failed, so that his claim now 
rests entirely on the laws prohibiting the introduc- 
tion of slaves in the United States. That the plain- 
tiff was imported since that prohibition does exist, 
is a fact sufliciently established by the evidence. 
What right he has acquired under the laws prohib- 
iting such importation is the only question Avhich 
we have to examine. Formerly, while the Act divid- 
ing Louisiana into two Territories was in force in 
this country, slaves introduced here in contravention 
of it were freed by the operation of that law ; but 
that Act was merged in the legislative provisions 
which were subsequently enacted on the subject of 
the importation of slaves into the United States 
generally. Under the now existing laius, the indi- 
viduals thus imported acquire no personal rights. 
They are mere passive beings, who are disposed of 
according to the will of the different Legislatures. 
In this country they are to remain slaves, and to be sold 
for the benefit of the State. The plaintiff, therefore, 
has nothing to claim as a freeman ; and as to a mere 
change of master, should such be his wish, he can- 
not be listened to in a Court of justice." (Wheeler, 
pp. 380-1.) 

2. But the descendants of Africans are not the 
only subjects of American slavery. The native 
Indians have also been enslaved, and tJieir descend- 
ants are still in slavery. In South Carolina, by Act 
of 1740, "All negroes, Indians^ (free Indians in 



282 THE AMEEICAX SLAVE CODE. 

amity ^\'itli this Government, and negroes, mulattoes, 
and mestizoes who are now free, excepted,) mulattoes 
and mestizoes who now are or shall hereafter be in 
this province, and all their issue and offspring born 
or to be born, shall be and are hereby declared to 
be and to remain for ever hereafter, absolute 
slaves, and shall follow the conditwn of the mother^ 
(2 Brevard's Digest, 229.) Similar in Georgia. 
(Prince's Dig., 446, Act of 1770.) And in Mis- 
sissippi. (Rev. Code Miss, of 1823, p. 369.) And 
in Virginia. (1 Rev. Code of 1819.) And in Ken- 
tucky. (2 Littell and Swigert's Dig., 1149-50.) And 
in Louisiana. (Civil Code Lou., art. 183. Stroud's 
Sketch, pp. 11, 12-15.) Same in New-Jersey^ by de- 
cision of Supreme Court, 1797. (Stroud, p. 16.) 

And finally, 

3. Whites are enslaved. Several known instances 
have occurred already of the successful kidnapping 
of free whites, without a drop of negro or Indian 
blood in their veins ! And the process of intermix- 
ture of the races is now so far advanced, and is so 
rapidly going forward, that a "perfectly white com- 
plexion, light blue eyes, and flaxen hair," are scarcely 
a presumptive evidence of freedom. Persons thus 
described are advertised as runaway slaves; are 
liable to be pursued with muskets and bloodhounds, 
shot, maimed, captured, brought before United States 
Marshals, sworn to be slaves, given up and sent to 
the rice and cotton and sugar plantations of the 
South, without trial hy jury, and by a "summary" 
process that precludes any thing deserving the 



ITS ORIGIN- AND SUBJECTS. 283 

name of an investigation. Sometimes, under a 
peremptory refusal to wait a few hours for wit- 
nesses. Yet the people imagine themselves free, 
and their liberties secure under this enactment, 
(the Fugitive Slave Bill of 1850,) which, ivhile it 
makes no distinction of color, forbids them, under 
pains and penalties, to "harbor" and "entertain" 
each other when thus pursued ! By the estimate of 
Henry Clay, (speech in Senate, 1839,) one hundred 
and fifty years will obliterate the distinctions of race 
and color in this country, but without abolishing 
slavery ! Reposing, as it does, by his showing, upon 
the " rights of property," and " sanctified and sanc- 
tioned" already "by two centuries of legislation," 
its conservators look for its perpetuity, as they do 
for the perpetuity of property in "brood mares and 
their increase." For " that is property which the 
law declares to be property," The blacks will not be 
the slaves of the whites, but the poorer will be the 
slaves of the wealthier ; and the most they can hope 
for is that, perhaps, they will be kept "fat and 
sleek!" Their idolized statesmen, their venerated 
religious teachers, can promise them nothing better. 
Nor do they seem to desire it! The "innocent 
legal relation" of slave ownership conducts us to 
this result, and it leaves us here. 

In our chapter concerning "Fugitives from 
Slavery," it was shown that the State of Maryland, 
at an early date, (1715,) enacted laws by which all 
persons, irrespective of color, were forbidden to travel 
out of their own county without an official pass ; 



284 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

and " if apprehended, not being sufficiently known, 
nor able to give a good account of themselves," the 
magistrates might deal with them as with runaways, 
and sell them temporarily, to pay their fines. Our 
Fugitive Slave Bill of 1850, in like manner, knows 
notJiing of color ; and its j^ro visions are more strin- 
gent and humiliating than the old law of Maryland! 

The reader is referred to Jay's Yiew, pp. 83-87, 
for a number of advertisements of runaway slaves, 
in Avhich they are described as being lohite. 

As for example — 

" $100 Eeward. — The above reward will be paid 
for the apprehension of my man William. Il'e is a 
very bright mulatto, straight yellowish hair. I have 
no doubt he will change his name, and try to pass 
himself for a ivhite man, which he may be able to 
do, unless to a close observer. — T. S. Pitchard." 

"$100 Eeward. — Ran away from James Hyhart, 
Paris, Ky., &c., the mulatto boy Norton, &c. Would 
be taken for a white boy, if not closely examined. 
His hair is black and straight, &;c," — New-Orleatis 
Free American^ 11th Aug. 1836. 

Anderson Bowles advertises, in the Richmond 
Whig, 6th Jan. 1836, his " negro .'" who has "straight 
hair," and is "nparly white;" so that "a stranger" 
would suppose there was "?20 African blood in himy 
" He was with my boy Dick a short time since at 
Norfolk, and offered to sell him, but escaped, under 
pretense of being a white man." 

In the Newborn Spectator, 13th March, 1837, John 
T. Lane advertises " Wilham, about 19 years old, 



ITS ORIGIN AXD SUBJECTS. 285 

quite lohite., and would not readily be taken for a 
slave." 

Edwin Peck, Mobile, April 22, 1837, offers $100 
reward for a slave named Sam, " light sandy hair, 
Hue eyes, ruddy complexion ; is so white as very easily 
to pass for a v:hite many 

In tlie Kew- Orleans Bee of June 22, 1831, P. Balio 
advertises as a runaway, " Maria, ivitli a clear white 
comjylexion.^^ 

"Mr. Paxton, a Virginia writer, tells us in his 
work on Slaverj^, that ' the best blood of Virginia 
runs in the veins of slaves.' " (Jay's View, p. 85.) 

" Dr. Torrey, in his work on Domestic Slavery in 
the United States, p. 1-1," relates, that " not far from 
Fredericktown there was a slave estate, on which 
there were several ivhite females, of as fair and ele- 
gant appearance as white ladies in general, held in 
legal bondage as slaves." (lb., pp. 85-6.) 

"AVhite lady fugitives" have been hunted in the 
State of New- York, and have taken refuge in Can- 
ada. (Vide Utica ^^ Friend of Man,'''' and the Syra- 
cuse papers.) 

"A Missouri paper, reporting the trial of a slave 
boy, says, 'All the physiological marks of distinction 
which characterize the African descent had disap- 
peared.' " (Jay's View, p. 86.) 

Mr. Niles, in his Register, tells us that John C. 
Calhoun related a similar instance. ( lb., 23p.86-7.) 

" Mary Gillmore, of Philadelphia, claimed as a 
runaway slave in 1835, was proved to be the child 
of Irish parents, and had not a single drop of Afri- 
can blood in her veins," (lb., p. 86.) 



PART II. 



RELATION OF THE SLAVE TO SOCIETY AND TO 
CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 



CHAPTER I. 

OF THE GROUND AJS'D KATURE OF THE SLAVE'S CIVIL 
COXDITIOX. 

The Civil Condition of the Slave grows out of his relation to his Master as 
"property," and is determined and defined tiy it. 

If slaves were "deemed, reputed, and adjudged 
in law" to be "sentient beings," and not "things," 
tiien their relation to society and to civil govern- 
ment -would be the relation of human beings. But 
this is directly the opposite of the fact. " Slaves" 
are " deemed, solely taken, and adjudged in law to be 
chattels personal, in the hands of their owners and 
possessors, their administrators and assigns, to all in- 
tents, constructions^ and 'purposes whatsoever^ Their 
relation to society and to civil government is, ac- 
cordingly, the relation of brutes. 

The only real exception to this, or modification of 
it, is where the interests of the " owner," the wants 
of society, or the exigences of the Government re- 
quire an anomalous departure from the j^rinciple of 
slave chattelhood, by the temporary and partial re- 
cognition of their humanity. Such exceptions and 
13 



290 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

modifications are never made for the benefit of the 
slave. They enable the Government to punish., as a 
human being, the poor creature whom, in no other 
respect, it recognizes as such ! The slave is subjected 
to the control of the Government, but is not con- 
sidered entitled to its protection. 

The slave cannot be considered by the Govern- 
ment as entitled to its protection while he is not re- 
garded by it as having any rights to be protected. 
And the Government that recognizes and jDrotects 
slave chattelhood has already, in that very act, de- 
nied to the slave the possession of any rights by 
denying to him the right of self -owner ship, which is 
the foundation and parent stock of all other rights, 
and without which they cannot exist. 

Having no right to himself, to his bones, muscles, 
and intellect, (being all of them the property of his 
■*' owner,") he has no right to his own industry, to 
its wages or its products ; no right to property or 
capability of possessing it, as already shown. Of 
course he has no rights of property to be protected by 
the Government, and none of the rights that grow 
out of them. 

Having no recognized right of making any con- 
tract, he has no contracts with others to be enforced 
by the Government, and no one has any legal pecu- 
niary claims upon him to be enforced. He can 
neither sue nor be sued. This is no arbitrary rule. 
It is the inevitable result of his chattelhood. 

Unable to contract marriage, as already seen, he 
can bring no action at law against the violator of his 



slave's civil condition. 291 

bed. Having no marital or parental rights, he has 
none for the Government to protect. 

Not being accounted a person, but a thing, he can 
have no personal rights to be protected — no rights 
of reputation or character — no right to education — 
no rights of conscience — no rights of personal secu- 
rity — no social rights — no political capabilities or 
rights — not even the right of petition, as the Federal 
Congress (very consistently with its recognition of 
legal human chattelhood) have affirmed. It would 
be an anomaly to receive the testimony of such an 
one in a Court of law ! 

It is futile, it is absurd, it is self-contradictory, it 
is short-sighted and foolish (to say nothing more 
severe) for any persons to find fault with any of these 
things while they recognize as innocent and valid 
" the legal relation of master and slave,^^ the relation of 
slave ownership, which includes, implies, and necessi- 
tates it all. Such persons should ask themselves 
seriously what they ivould have? 

Would they have the Government stultify itself, 
and add mockery to injustice by pretending to at- 
tempt known impossibilities in the enactment of 
contradictions ? by making a show of civil protection 
where none is intended, or where they have rendered 
it impossible? What protection can they bestow so 
long as, by sustaining or even permitting or tolerating 
human chattelhood, or failing tosiqopress it as a crime, 
they leave not the slave the jDOSsession of one single 
right of humanity to he protected ? 

Or, suppose the Government to be honest and 



292 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

successful iu its attempts to confer upon the slave 
civil rights^ to recognize and treat liim as a member 
and component element of civil society. Suppose it 
to protect, instead of denying these rights — rights of 
conscience— rights of security— rights of reputation- 
right to education — free speech — parental rights — 
marital rights — ^right of testimony — right to sue and 
be sued — right to make contracts — rights of pro- 
perty — right to his earnings and products. What 
would become of the right of slave ownership, " the 
legal relation of master and slave?" Would it not 
vanish and disappear ? Assuredly it would. 

These thoughts open a wide field for reflection 
and remark, if we could spare room. 

The Hebrew servitude, so often cited as a prece- 
dent for modern slavery, was wanting in its essential 
element, human chattelhood. Its abundant recog- 
nition and guaranty of the civil rights of servants 
ailbrds demonstrative proof of this. 

In the Spanish, Portuguese, French, and even the 
(recent) British West India types of slavery, we see 
the principle of human chattelhood less perfectly 
developed than in our own, less consistently en- 
forced. They exhibit faint recognitions of civil 
rights in the enslaved. They are less inveterate, 
and hence (under the same appliances) less difficult 
to be overthrown. In our countr}', where so much 
is said and known of human rights, the slave power 
has been compelled to fortify and entrench itself 
in the most unlimited and unmitigated sj-stem of 
despotism ever known or conceived. 



slave's civil condition. 293 

In dealing with such a type of slavery, it is espe- 
cially important to remember that nothing is to be 
accomplished without striking directly at the root. 
Attempts at ameliorations, restrictions, limitations, 
and gradual removal, are signally out of place here. 
jSuch a despotism, under such a form of government, 
and in such a state of society as ours, and at such a 
crisis as that which is now reached, must be over- 
whelmed and uprooted speedily, or it will overwhelm 
and uproot all that does not harmonize with and up- 
hold it. But we must not enlarge. 

The statements made in this chapter, like those 
made in the first chapter of the former series, will 
be found to contain the key to the chapters that 
follow. And the present series is the sequel to the 
former one. 

The single idea of human chattelhood, or of slave 
ownership, carried out in all possible directions, 
gives us the details of the entire code of slavery. 
Take away that, and they all vanish. Ketain it, and 
they all stand firmly. The Courts in the slave 
States understand this. 

"A slave is in absolute bondage. He has no civil 
rights." So said Judge Crenshaw, in Brandon et al. 
vs. Planters' and Merchants' Bank of Huntsville, 
Jan. T., 1838 ; 1 Stewart's Ala. Eep., 320. Same 
principle in Bynum vs. Bostwick, 4 Desauss., 266. 
Wheeler, p. 6. 

^^/Slaves are deprived of all civil rights," '■'■Emanci- 
pation gives to the slave his civil rights." (Judge 
Matthews, in Girod vs. Lewis, May T., 1819; 6 



294 THE AMEEIC^^JN" SLAVE CODE. 

Martin's Lou. Rep., 559. Wheeler, p. 199.) If tliis 
be true in Louisiana, with its relics of the Code Noir, 
we may be well assured that it is true of the codes 
of the other States. 



CHAPTER II. 

NO ACCESS OF SLAVES TO THE JUDICIARY, AISTD NO 
HONEST PROVISION FOR TESTING THE CLAIMS OP 
THE ENSLAVED TO FREEDOil. 

" A Slave cannot be a party to a eivil suit." (Stroud's Sketch, p. 76.) 

"A SLAVE cannot be a party to a suit, except in tlio 
single case where a negro is held as a slave and he 
claims to be free." [We omit the references to 
authorities here cited.] "It would be an idle form 
and ceremony to make a slave a party to a suit, by 
the instrumentality of which he could recover no- 
thing ; or, if a recovery could be had, the instant it 
was recovered, would belong to the master. A slave 
can possess nothing. He can hold nothing. He is 
therefore not a competent party to a suit. And the 
same rule prevails wherever slavery is tolerated, 
whether there be legislative enactments upon the 
subject or not." (Note to p. 197, in Wheeler's Law 
of Slavery. Case of Berard vs. Berard, before cited.) 

We proceed to examine the condition of the slave 
in reference to suits for freedom. 

" In all cases where the slave alleges to be free, he 



296 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

is of course a party. He may have a habeas corpus^ 
and if there be a false return, may sue upon it. Or 
he may bring a trespass for assault and battery, and 
false imprisonment, in which action, the defendant, 
to justify himself must plead that he is his slave. In 
many States he may proceed by petitions for free- 
dom." (Note in Wheeler, p. 197.) 

In inquiring after " the origin of the relation and 
its subjects," (Chapter XXIII. of the former series,) 
it was ascertained that colored persons who cannot 
prove their freedom may be enslaved; that colored 
persons, whether negroes or mulattoes, whether bond 
or free, cannot be admitted as witnesses to prove 
their freedom, (a free colored mother not being per- 
jiiitted to come into Court to identify, under oath, 
her own kidnapped free child, torn from her arms 
the day previous, nor give testimony to the fact, nor 
identify the kidnapper!) it was ascertained, further, 
that color was held to be presumptive evidence of 
the condition of slavery. The bearing of all this 
upon law-suits for the recovery of freedom will be 
readily appreciated. (Hudgins vs. Wrights, 1 Hen. 
and Munf. Va. Eep., 131.) Judge Eoane said: " In 
the case of a person visibly appearing to be a negro, 
the presumption is, in this country, that he is a slave, 
and it is incumbent on him to make out his right to 
freedom ; but in the case of a person visibly appear- 
ing to be a white man, or an Indian, the presumption 
is that he is free, and it is necessary for his adver- 
sary to show that he is a slave." (Wheeler, p. 
894.) 



NO ACCESS TO JUDICIARY. 297 

The same principle appears in other cases, and 
seems to be the general rule. 

South Carolina. — The act of 1740 provides that 
" if any negro, Indian, mulatto, or mestizo, claim 
his or her freedom, it shall be lawful" for such per- 
son "to apply to the Judges," &c., who are empow- 
ered to appoint for the applicant a guardian, to 
prosecute in his or her behalf, &c., &c. "And if 
judgment shall be given for the plaintiff, a special 
entry shall be made, declaring that the ward of the 
plaintiff is free, and the jury shall assess damages, 
with full costs of suit; — but in case judgment shall be 
given for the defendant, the said Court is hereby fully em- 
powered to inflict SUCH CORPORAL PUNISHMENT, NOT 
EXTENDING TO LIFE OR LIMB, on the toard of the plain- 
tiff, as they, in their discretion, shall think fit. Provided 
that, in any action or suit to be brought in pursuance 
of the direction in this Act, the burthen of the 

PROOF SHALL LAY ON THE WARD OF THE PLAINTIFF, 

and it shall always be PRESUMED that every negro, In- 
dian, midatto and mestizo is a slave, unless the contrary 
be made to appear ; (the Indians in amity with the 
Government excepted, in which case the burthen of 
proof shall be on the defendant.)" (2 Brevard's 
Digest, 229-80.) 

In Georgia, the Act of May 10, 1770, is almost 
literally a copy of the preceding. (Prince's Digest, 
446.) 

The slave, it seems, must first find a white friend 
willing to incur the expense and trouble of conduct- 
ing the suit, liable, in case of failure, to lose the costs. 
18* 



298 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Then he must find tcMte witnesses to prove liis free- 
dom, instead of demanding that the pretended 
"owner" (as in the case of other property) prove 
his right to ownership. And then, for the crime of 
losing his case in Court, (the fault, perhaps, of Judge 
and jur}^, even bj their own laws,) he may be sub- 
jected, by the same Court, to corporal punishment, 
resulting perhaps, in " death hy moderate correction ! ! /" 
But this is not all. 

In South CaroUna, by Act of 1802, (by way of pro- 
gress in sixty-two years!) "^Ae cjuardian''^ (in a trial 
for freedom) " of a slave " (who may have been ille- 
gally imported into the State, and is, on that account, 
by the same law, declared to be free) " claiming his 
freedom shall be liable to double costs of suit, if his 
action shall be adjudged groundless; and shall be 
liable to pay to the bona fide owner of such slave, 
all such damages as shall be assessed by a jury, and 
adjudged by any Court of Common Pleas," (2 Bre- 
vard's Digest, 260.) 

In Maryland, the attorney^ in a trial for freedom, 
must pay all the costs, unless the Court shall be of 
opinion that there was probable cause for supposing 
that the petitioner had a right to freedom." (Act of 
1796, chap. 67, sect. 25.) And on such a trial, the 
master (the defendant) is allowed twelve peremptory 
challenges as to the jurors. (lb., sect. 24.) 

In Virginia, " for aiding and abetting a slave, in a 
trial for freedom, if the claimant fail in his suit, a 
fine of one hundred dollars is imposed." And this 
is by the "Eeyised Code" (of 1819), 482. 



NO ACCESS TO JUDICIARY. 299 

Missouri mercifally alloAvs tlie slave, on permis- 
sion of Court, to "sue as a poor person." So far, 
the law appears praiseworthy. Yet " it is made to 
depend upon the arbitrament of the Court, or even 
of a single Judge, whether the petitioner shall be 
heard by a jury at all." (Stroud, p. 78.) 

In Alabama, the objectionable parts of the Missouri 
law are retained, and the beneficial provisions omit- 
ted! (lb. Toulmin's Digest, 632.) 

It is evident that very few of the thousands of 
free colored persons kidnapped into slavery, or 
otherwise held, contrary to even the Southern laws, 
will ever be able to institute a suit at law for their 
freedom ; and it is equally evident that very few of 
those who may get their cases into Court will ever 
derive any benefit from the process, but only secure 
to themselves a terrible punishment in the first in- 
stance, and worse treatment from their masters after- 
wards. The spirit of these laws warrants us to say 
this. 



CHAPTER III. 

KEJECTIOX OF TESTIMONY OF SLAVES AND FREE 
COLORED PERSOXS. 

Slavery is upheld by suppressing the testimony of its Victims. 

"A SLAVE cannot be a witness against a white per- 
son, either in a civil or criminal cause." (Stroud's 
Sketch, p, 65.) 

"It is an inflexible and universal rule of slave 
law, founded in one or two States upon usage, in 
others sanctioned by express legislation., that the 

TESTIMONY OF A COLORED PERSON, WHETHER BOND 
OR FREE, CANNOT BE RECEIVED AGAINST A WHITE 

PERSON. (lb., p. 27. Same in Wheeler's Law of 
Slavery, 193-5.) 

In Virginia, tlie Act of Assembly is as follows : 
"Any negro or mulatto, bond or free, shall be a good 
witness in pleas of the Commonwealth, for or 
against negroes or mulattoes, bond or free, or in 
civil pleas where free negroes or mulattoes shall 
alone be parties, and in no other cases whateverj^ (1 
Eevised Code, 422.) 

Similar in Missomi. (Missouil Laws, 600.) And 



NO COLORED WITNESSES. 301 

in Mississippi. (Revised Code, 872.) And in Ken- 
tucky. (2 Littell and Swigert's Digest, 1150.) And 
in Alabama. (Toulmin's Dig., 627.) And in Mary- 
land. (Maryland Laws, Act of 1717, cliap. 13, sects. 
2, 3 ; and Act of 1751, chap. 14, sect. 4.) And in 
North Carolina and Tennessee. (Act of 1777, chap. 
2, sect. 42.) And in the free State of Ohio. (Act 
of January 25, 1807.) 

In South Carolina and in Louisiana there are 
enactments which, in direct allusion to this feature 
of their laws, and reciting in a preamble, that 
" Whereas mamj cruelties may he committed on slaves 
because no ivhite person may he inesent to give evidence 
of the same, unless some Tnethod be provided for the better 
discovery of the offense,'" &c., &c., Be it enacted, &c., &c. : 
The only remedy provided is, that "when no white 
person shall be present," or, being present, shall re- 
fuse to testify, "the owner or other person having 
charge of such slave [who shall have "suffered in 
life, limb, member," &c.] shall be deemed guilty and 
punished," " unless such owner or other person, 
&;c., can make the contrary appear by good and 
sufficient evidence, OR shall, by his own oath, 
clear and exculpate liimselff^ and the Court may ad- 
minister the oath and ^^ acquit the offender, if clear 
proof of the offense be not made by two witnesses 
at least." (2 Brevard's Dig., 242.) 

Judge Stroud (in his Sketch, &c., p. 76) considers 
this " a modification of the former law, not for the 
protection of the slave, but for the especial 

BENEFIT OF A CRUEL MASTER OR OVERSEER." 



302 THE AMEEICAN SLAVE CODE. 

In most of tlie slaveholding States, the owners of 
slaves are required by law " to keep at least one 
white person on each plantation to which a certain 
number of slaves is attached." (Stroud, p. 67.) 
This indicates the previous absence of white persons, 
and the consequent lack of white witnesses. Whe- 
ther the law was ostensibly for the remedy of that 
defect, or whether it was for the greater security 
against the slaves, does not appear. It is hardly 
credible that a white person is employed for the 
former object. And as most of the present overseers 
are whites, it may be inferred that the design was to 
discountenance the employment of slaves or other 
colored persons as overseers. Be this as it may, a 
white overseer answers the requisitions of the law, 
and he could hardly be a witness against himself, 
though specially authorized to exculpate himself by 
his own oath ! 

Chief Justice Ottley, of St. Vincent's, in answer 
to Parliamentary inquiries proposed to him in 1791, 
said : 

"The only instances in which their [the slaves'] 
persons appear to be protected by the letter of the 
law, are in cases of murder, dismemberment, and 
mutilation ; and in these cases, as the evidence of 
slaves is never admitted against a white man, the 
difficulty of cstabUshing the facts is so great, that 
ivhite men o.re^ in a manner, put beyond ilie reach of the 
law:' 

Sir William Young, Governor of Tobago in 1811, 
and an advocate of slavery, said : ^'I think the slaves 



NO COLORED WITNESSES. 803 

have no 2')rotection. In this, as I doubt not in every 
other island, tliere are laius for the protection of the 
slaves, and good 07ies, but circumstances in the ad- 
ministration of whatever law, render it a dead letter. 
When the intervention of the law is most required, it 
will have the least effect ; as, in most cases, where a 
vindictive and cruel master has care to commit the 
most atrocious cruelties, even to murder his slave, 

NO FREE PERSON BEING PRESENT TO WITNESS THE 
ACT," &C., &C. 

Many others, holding official stations in the British 
West Indies during the existence of slavery, have 
testified to the same general fact, the insufficiency 
of all laws for the protection of slaves, in consequence 
of rejecting slave testimony. (Vide Stephen's West 
Indian Slavery, pp. 168-9.) 

The case is too plain to require either testimony 
or argument. A community or a Government that 
could tolerate such rejection of testimony — the tes- 
timony of the defenseless against those holding and 
daily exercising despotic power over them — must be 
resolutely bent on oppressing instead of protecting 
them. 

Yet the reasonableness of the rule is beyond ques 
tion, if the " innocent legal relation" is to be pre 
served. It would be an absurdity for chattels to 
come into Court and bear testimony against their 
owners ! They could not he " chattels, to all intents, 
constructions, and purposes whatsoever." They could 
not remain chattels at all. The power to testify 
against their owners and overseers Avould imply the 



804 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

right of protection from assaults by them. " The 
slave, to REMAIN a slave," said Judge Eufiin, " must 
be sensible that there is NO appeal from his master." 
Allow slaves to testify, and the hitherto unimagined 
secrets of the Bastile would explode like an earth- 
quake. Universal humanity would unite in one 
general crusade, and break down the whole fabric. 



CHAPTEE ly. 

SUBJECTION TO ALL WHITE PEESONS. 

" Submission is required of the Slave, not to the will of the Master only, hut 
to the will of all other White Persons." (Stroud's Sketch, pp. 96-7.) 

In Georgia it is enacted, tliat " If any slave shall 
'presume to strike any ivhite person, such slave, upon 
trial and conviction before the Justice or Justices, 
according to the directions of this Act, shall, for the 
first offense, suffer such punishment as the said Jus- 
tice or Justices shall, in his or their discretion, think 
fit, not extending to life or limb ; and for the second 
offense, suffer DEATH." " Provided always, that 
such striking, &c., be not done by the command 
and in the defense of the owner or other person 
having the care and government of such slave, in 
which case the slave shall be wholly excused, and 
the owner or other person, &c., shall be answerable, 
as if the act had been committed by himself." (Prince's 
Digest, 450.) 

South Carolina has an Act in the same words, ex- 
cept that death is the penalty of the ihircl offense, 
instead of the second. (2 Brevard's Digest, 235.) 



306 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

In Maryland, for tliis oflfense, the offender's ears 
may be cropped, tliough lie be a free black. (Act 
of 1723," chap. 15, sect, 4.) 

In Kentucky there is the same jDrohibition ; and, 
as in Maryland, free colored persons are included. 
Penalty, "thirty lashes on his or Aerbare back, ■well 
laid on." (Littell and Swigert's Digest, 1153.) 

In Virginia, the same as in Kentucky, from 1680 
till 1792, when the following exception was added : 
" Except in those cases where it shall appear to said 
Justice that such negro or mulatto was wantonly 
assaulted^ and lifted his or her hand in his or her self- 
defense." (1 Rev. Code, 426-7.) 

In Maryland, " K any slave shall hapjien to be 
slain for refusing to surrender him or herself, con- 
trary to law, or in unlawful resisting any officer, or 
other person^ who shall endeavor to apprehend such 
slave or slaves, &c., such officer or other j^erson so 
killing such slave, as aforesaid, making resistance, shall 
be and is by this Act indemnified from any prosecu- 
tion for such killing aforesaid," &c. (Maryland Laws, 
Act of 1751, chap. 14, sect. 9.) This is cited b}^ Judge 
Stroud as a specimen of the laws of several States, 
(pp. 98-9.) 

South Carolina. — Act of 1740: " If any slave who 
shall be out of the house or plantation where such 
slave shall live or shall be usually employed, or 
without some white person in company with such 
slave, shall refuse to submit to undergo the examina- 
tion of any lohite person, it shall be lawful for any 
such white person to pursue, apprehend, and mode- 



SUBJECTION OF COLOR. 807 

rately correct sucli slave ; and if sucli slave shall 
assault and strike such white person, such slave may- 
be lawfalhj hiUecrm (2 Brevard's Digest, 231.) 

It does not appear that any of these laws recognize 
or contemplate any self-defense by the slave, male 
or female, from the most villanous assaults of any 
white person, except the Act of Virginia. And as the 
"negro or mulatto," whether bond or free, cannot 
lodge a complaint, or even testify, it is not easy to 
see how the exception can be made available for his 
or her benefit. Such laws illustrate the general po- 
sition already laid down, that the Government can- 
not secure to the master his assumed right of slave 
ownership, and yet extend to the slave civil protec- 
tion. If the negro be a chattel, he must needs be 
restrained from straying ; he must be held subject, 
like other domestic animals, to the superior race 
holding dominion over him. It would be prepos- 
terous for the Legislature to attempt doing this by 
a process which should at the same time provide for 
his protection as a man ! It would be abusive to 
demand this at their hands, if the "relation" of human 
chattelhood is to be held legal and innocent ! 

Yet the existence of such laws renders more than 
probable, and even certain, the common prevalence 
of the Avorst outrages that could be imagined. The 
best laAvs cannot fully protect the weaker portion of 
a community ngainst the stronger. The weak must 
be left utterly defenseless when all protecting laws 
are only repealed. But the climax is reached when, 
ly express statute, each member of the weaker class 



808 THE AilERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

is placed under the absolute control of any one of 
the dominant class ; when resistance is forbidden 
on penalty of stripes and cropping by the public 
authorities, with the liability of being "lawfully 
killed" by the assailant ! If civil government were 
designed for human demoralization and torture, it is 
not easy to see how its ends could be more efiectually 
reached. 



CHAPTEE V. 

PENAL LAWS AGAINST SLAVES. 

The Laws are unequal— their administration despotic— their execution bar- 
barous. Even this is exceeded by " Lynch Law." 

The slave, Avho is but "a chatteV on all other 
occasions, with not one solitary attribute of person- 
ality accorded to him, becomes " a person''' whenever 
he is to be ^^iwzts/zecZ / He is the only being in the 
universe to whom is denied all self- direction and free 
agency, but who is, nevertheless, held responsible 
for his conduct, and amenable to law. Forbidden 
to read the law, and kept as ignorant and as unen- 
lightened as possible, he is nevertheless accounted 
criminal for acts which are deemed innocent in 
others, and punished with a severity from which all 
others are exempted. He is under the control of 
law, though unprotected hy law, and can know law 
only as an enemy, and not as a friend. 

The following statement is evidently as favorable 
a one as could be made, yet it attests the main facts 
of the. case ; and what seems to have been intended 
as a palhation is the strongest condemnation of the 
slave system, especially of this feature of it. 



810 THE AMERICAN" SLAVE CODE. 

" Much has been said of the disj^aritj of punish- 
ment between the white inhabitants and the slaves 
and negroes of the same State ; that slaves are pun- 
ished with much more severity, for the commission 
of similar crimes by white persons, than the latter. 
The charge is undoubtedly true to a considerable 
extent. It must be remembered that the primary 
object of the enactment of penal laws is the protec- 
tion and security of those tvho make them.^' The 
SLAVE HAS NO AGENCY IN MAKING THEM. He is 

indeed one cause of the apprehended evils to the 
other class, which those laws are exjDCcted to remedy. 
That he should be held amenable for the violation 
of those rules established for the security of the 
other, is the natural result of the state in ivhich he is 
placed. And the severity of those rules will always 
bear a relation to that danger, real or ideal, of the 
other class.f It has been so among all nations, a7id 
ivill ever continue to he so, while the disparity between 
bond and free remains. In a practical treatise it 
would probably be considered out of place to col- 
lect the various statutes in relation to whipping and 
other punishment of slaves, to be found in the sta- 
tute hooks of the various States." (iSTote in Wheeler's 
Law of Slavery, pp. 222-3.) 

* The " primary" and onh/ object of all honest legislation is the 
protection of the equal rights of all. 

\ From -wlience comes that "danger, real or ideal," that calls 
for such severe laws? What but injustice, and a coiiscioiisness of 
tliat injustice, could make the governing party thus apprehensive 
of " danger?" 



LAWS AGAINST SLAVES. 811 

The punishment of slaves by their owners has 
already been examined. Their punishment by civil 
government, or by society, is the topic now under 
review. Not a few specimens have fallen under our 
notice already, as connected with other points of 
inquiry. We must briefly recall these, and connect 
them with others of a like character. 

We have seen how the "cruel punishments" in- 
flicted by the master are expressly sanctioned by 
the Legislatures, and how the public arm, with its 
sheriffs and prisons, is at the beck of the slave- 
holder, as his agents and instruments, whenever he 
wishes his slaves punished ! We have seen, too, 
some few specimens of direct penal infliction upon 
the slave by the Government. For the crime of 
earning propert}^ and making bargains, we have 
seen his property seized and confiscated for the 
benefit of the whites, who pretended to doubt 
whether he could take care of himself! For the 
misdemeanor of "hiring himself out," even with 
the consent of his master, we have seen him 
"apprehended" as a felon. For seeking liberty, and 
the protection of law, we have seen him proclaimed 
an outlaw, and "lawfully killed!" For attending a 
religious meeting in the evening, conducted by 
whites^ and staying till the close of the meeting, we 
have seen him, with his wife and children, locked 
up in the Avatch -house till morning, with no bed but 
the floor. For keeping a weapon or club, we have 
seen him subjected, by a cowardly code, to public 
whipping! For being absent without a "pass," to 



312 THE americ.'\:n' slave code. 

visit a wife or child, we have seen him under the 
same sentence ! For riding on horseback, whipped 
or branded. For losing a cause at Court, when sue- 
ing for freedom, any "corporal punishment, not 
extending to life or limb," with the hazard of 
" death by moderate correction," 

Free negroes, for entertaining or assisting fugitive 
slaves, or giving or selling certificates of freedom, 
we have seen subjected to heavy fines; and, in 
default of payment, sale into slavery. For being 
arrested on suspicion of being slaves, we have seen 
them fined and enslaved. For ^^ presuming to strike 
a white person," punished with whipping or crop- 
ping ! In the case of slaves, for the second or third 
offense, death! 

All these are but specimens of similar legislation. 
For taking away or loosing a boat, a slave in South 
Carolina is to receive thirty-nine lashes ; " for the 
second oftense, shall forfeit and have cut off from his 
head ONE ear." (2 Brev. Dig., 228.) So, as to the 
first offense, in North Carolina and Tennessee. (Hay- 
wood's Manual, 78.) 

" For having an?/ article of property [in Kentucky] 
without a ticket of permission from his master, 
pa,rticularly specifying the same, and authorizing it 
to be sold by the slave, ten lashes, by order of the 
captain of the patrollers;" and "if the slave be 
taken before a magistrate, thirty-nine lashes may be 
ordered." (Littell and Swigert's Dig., 11.) Also in 
North Carolina and Tennessee. (Haywood's Manual, 
629.) And in Mississippi. (Rev. Code, 390.) 



LAWS AGAINST SLAVES. 313 

A slave in Kentucky, being at an unlawful assem- 
hhj* the captain of patrollers may inflict ten lashes 
upon him. (Littell and Swigert's Dig., 981 ; also 
2 Missouri Laws, 741, sect. 2 ; and ibid., 614.) If 
taken before a magistrate, he may direct thirty-nine 
lashes. 

To beat the Patuxent river, (to catch fish,) ten 
lashes. (Maryland Laws, 1796, chap. 32, sect. 3, 
&c., &c.) 

In North Carolina, a " slave, hunting with dogs in 
the woods even of his master, is subjected to a whip- 
ping of tliirty lashes." (Haywood's Manual, 524, 
Act of 1753.) 

We reserve for their appropriate chapters, the 
penal laws against mental instruction, and assembling 
together for religious worship, except with white 
persons. 

The reader will have noticed that a large portion 
of the offenses thus punished are not considered 
offenses when committed by ichite persons ! Another 
feature deserves notice. 

" In Virginia, hy the Revised Code (of 1819,) there 
are seventj-one offenses for which the penalty is 
DEATH when committed by slaves, and imj)risonment 
when committed by whites." (Jay's Inquiry, p. 134.) 

In Mississippi there are seventeen offenses pun- 
ishable with DEATH when committed by slaves, 
which, if committed by white persons, are either 

* Meetings for "mental instruction" and "religious "worship'' 
are among the "unlawful assemblies" forbidden, as will be seen in 
another chapter. 

14 



814 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

punished by fines or imprisonment, or punishment 
"not provided for by statute," or at "common law." 
(Stroud's Sketch, p. 110-11.) 

" Where human hfe is so cheap, and human suf- 
fering so little regarded, it is not to be expected that 
the dispensers of slave justice will submit to be 
troubled with all those forms and ceremonies which 
the common law has devised for the protection of 
innocence. We have seen that, in many instances, 
any ivhite person may, instanter, discharge the func- 
tions of judge, jury, and executioner. In innumer- 
able instances, all these functions are united in a 
single justice of the peace; and in South Carohna, 
Virginia, and Louisiana, life may be taken, accord- 
ing to law, without intervention of grand or j)etit 
jurors. In other States a trial by jury is granted in 
capital cases ; but in no one State, it is believed, is 
it thought worth while to trouble a grand jury with 
presenting a slave. In most of the slave States, the 
ordinary tribunal for slaves charged with offenses 
not capital, is composed of justices and freeholders, 
or of justices only. A white man cannot be convict- 
ed of misdemeanor, except by the unanimous verdict 
of twelve of his peers. In Louisiana, if the Court is 
equally divided as to the guilt of a slave, judgment 
is rendered against him !" (Jay's Inquir}-, p. 135.) 

The proper idea of trial by jury includes a trial by 
the "joeers" or EQUALS of the accused. There is no 
such jury trial for the slave! Trial by jury of slaves 
would soon upset the "legal relation" of slave 
owner I 



LAWS AGAINST SLAVES. 315 

In Tennessee, the sheriff is empowered to make 
selection of " three justices to i:)redde on the trial^ and 
twelve housekeepers being SLAVEHOLDERS to serve 
as ajunfH! (Tennessee Laws of 1819, chap. 35.) 
By a modification of this law in 1831, "House- 
holders mcaj serve as jurors, if slaveholders cannot he 
had''! (Child's Appeal, p. 70.) 

"In 1832, thirty-jive slaves were executed in 
Charleston, in pursuance of the sentence of a Court 
consisting of two justices and five freeholders, on 
charge of an intended insurrection. No indictments, 
no summoning of jurors, no challenges for cause or 
favor, no seclusion of the triers from intercourse 
with those who might bias their judgment, preceded 
this unparalleled destruction of human life." (Jay's 
Inquiry, p. 135.) 

Though no colored person, bond or free, can testify 
in any case where any white person is concerned, yet 
the evidence of " cdl free Indians without oath, and of 
any slave without oath,'' may be taken for or against a 
slave/ And among the ^^meritorious services" for 
which freedom is conferred, the most important is 
^^information of crimes committed by a slave." What 
a temptation for one slave to bear false testimony 
against another ! See Stroud's Sketch, p. 126, where 
the authorities arc cited for several States where 
this law prevails, viz : South Carolina, Virginia, 
ISI'orth Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missis- 
sippi ; with conditions, in Georgia and Louisiana. 

The law of South Carolina provides expressly, 
that slave trials shall proceed " in the most summary 



316 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

and expeditious manner f and also that, in case of 
conviction, the "Justice shall award such manner of 
ffm^A" as will " be most effectual to deter others," 
&c. (James's Dig., 392-3.) This authorized " the 
burning of a negro woman to death, as may be found 
in the dailj^ prints of 1820." (Stroud, p. 124.) Any 
other tortures might be inflicted. 

" The last authorized edition of the laws of Mary- 
land" (said Judge Stroud, in 1827) authorizes "to 
have the right hand cut off^ to be hanged in the usual 
manner, the head severed from the hody^ the hody divided 
into four quarters, and the head and quarters set up in 
the most jjuhlic places of the county ivhere such fact teas 
committed^ (Stroud, p. 117.) 

The burning to death a free colored man near St. 
Louis, the frequent infliction of murderous outrages 
by irresponsible "Lynch Committees" all over the 
South, by the testimony of their own journals, may 
assure us that, in the public administration of slave 
punishments, "the people are no better than their 
laws," but much "worse!" 

Communities tolerating such laws must become 
laAvless ; must lose the conception and the proper 
definition of LAW, in its just sense. They must be 
at once in a condition of despotism and of anarchy. 
And such is the known state of society at the 
South. 

And yet, no 2^^'C(ct{cal business man, who looks 
over, carefully, the whole ground, and knows human 
nature, and the circumstances of the times, will be 
likely to conclude that any better or milder code, or 



LAWS AGAINST SLAVES. 817 

method of administration, could preserve " the inno- 
cent legal relation of slave ownership !" If that 
is to be tolerated, all the rest is to be left where it is ! 
Indeed, the Note of Air. Wheeler, already quoted, 
(AVhcelcr's Law of Slavery, pp. 222-3,) very nearly 
expresses this idea; and in looking over his few re- 
ported cases on this subject, we find nothing to dis- 
parage the conclusion. 

We notice the following items, as the most im- 
portant : 

"^ slave tried for a capital crime may be con- 
victed on testimony of a slave, though uncorroborated 
by pregnant circumstances." (Wheeler, p. 204. 
Case of the State vs. Ben, Dec. T., 1821 ; 1 Hawks' 
ISr. C. Eep., 434. Opinion of Judge Badger, Judge 
Hall dissenting.) 

"A slave on trial for a capital felony is entitled to 
a jury of slave owners." (AVheeler, p. 212. Case 
of the State vs. Jim, Dec. T., 1826 ; 1 Devereaux's 
K C. Eep., 142.) 

" On an indictment of a slave for a capital offense, 
the master cannot be compelled to testify." (The 
State vs. Charity, Dec. T., 1830 ; 2 Devereaux's K 
C. Eep., 214.) In delivering his opinion. Judge 
Eaffin said: "The privilege not to testify, on the 
ground of interest, is that of the master, not of the 
slave. It may consequently be waived by the for- 
mer. He may himself prosecute, and give evidence 
against his slave." "Could I separate her [the 
slave's] rights from those of the witness, [her mas- 
ter,] I would do so, and let the verdict stand, [a ver- 



318 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

diet of conviction for murder.] But tliey are so 
connected, that justice cannot be done to the master 
without giving to the slave the benefit of it. We 
cannot restore him his property, without vieldinsc 
her another trial for her life; nor reverse the judg- 
ment for the costs without reversinsr it altoaiether. 
I therefore conclude, though with great hesitation, 
that, as the master did object to be sworn, there 
must be a new trial." (Wheeler, pp. 214^15.) 

We see here the sacred rights of public justice 
on the one hand, (where the j^risoner was charged 
with the murder of her own child,) and the sacred 
rights of the accused to an impartial trial for her life, 
BOTH treated as inferior and minor interests, which 
must bend to the slave master's right of i^voperty in 
the accused ! If she was acquitted, as she probably 
was, at the new trial, it was not as a matter of justice 
or of mercy towards the accused or the murdered, 
but as an act of protection to slave property ! 

"Free persons of color are entitled to trial by 
jury." (Wheeler, p. 222. Bore vs. Bush, 18 Mar- 
tin's Lou. Eep., 1.) A jury, doubtless, of icliite men, 
NOT " a jury of their peers" or equals ! This is no 
"trial by jury" deserving the name. 



CHAPTER VI. 

EDUCATION PROHIBITED. 

The Slave not being regarded as a member of Society, nor as a human being, 
the Government, instead of providing for his education, takes care to forbid 
it, as being inconsistent with the condition of chattelhood. 

Chattels are not educated ! And if human be- 
ings are to be held in cliattelhood, education must 
be witlilield from them. 

South Carolina.— xVct of 1740: "Whereas, the 
having slaves taught to write, or suffering them to 
be employed in writing, ma}- be attended with great 
inconveniences ; Be it enacted, that all and every per- 
son and persons whatsoever, who shall hereafter 
teach or cause any slave or slaves to be taught to 
write, or shall use or employ any slave as a scribe, 
in any manner of writing whatsoever, hereafter 
taught to write, every such person or persons shall, 
for every such offense, forfeit the sum of one hundred 
pounds, current money." (2 Brevard's "Higest, 248.) 

Georgia, similar ; penalty, twenty pounds. (Prince's 
Dig., 445.) 

South Carolina.— Another Act in 1800: "That 
assemblies of slaves, free negroes, mulattoes and 



820 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

mestizoes, whether composed of all or of any of such 
description of persons, or of all or any of the same, 
and of a 'porlioa of white persons met together ^0/- the 
2mrpose of mental INSTRUCTION', in a confined or 
secret place, &c., &c., are declared to be an unlawful 
meeting; and magistrates, &;c., &c., are hereby re- 
quired, (fcc, to enter such confined places, &c., &;c., 
and break doors, if resisted, and to disperse such 
slaves, free negroes, kc, k.c ; and the officers dis- 
persing such unlawful assemblage may inflict such 
corporal punishment^ not exceeding twenty lashes^ upon 
such slaves, free negroes, &c., as they may judge neces- 
sary for DETERRING THEM FROM SUCH UNLAWFUL 

ASSEMBLAGE IN FUTURE." "That it shall not be 
lawful for any number of slaves, free negroes, mu- 
lattoes, or mestizoes, even in company loith tvhite per- 
sons, to meet together for tJie purpose of mental 
INSTRUCTION, either before the rising of the sun, or' 
after the going down of the same." (2 Brevard's 
Dig., 254-5.) 

YiYgima.— Revised Code of 1819: "That all meet- 
ings or assemblages of slaves, or free negroes or 
muhtttDes mixing and associating with such slaves 
at any meeting-house or houses, &;c., in the night ; or 
at any school or schools for teaching them reading 
OR ^VRITING, eitlier in the day or night, under whatso- 
ever pretext, shall be deemed and considered au 
unlawful assembly ; and any justice of a county, 
<S:c., wherein such assemblage shall be, either from 
his own knowledge or the information of others, of 
such unlawful assemblage, &c., may issue his war- 



LEARNING FORBIDDEN. 821 

rant, directed to any sworn officer or officers, au- 
thorizing him or them to enter the house or houses 
■where such unhiwful assemblages, &c., may be, for 
the purj^ose of apprehending or dispersing such slaves, 
and to inflict corporal punishment on the offender or 
offenders^ at the discretion of any justice of the peace, 
not exceeding iicentg lashes.''^ (1 Rev. Code, 424—5.) 

Besides the State laws, the corporate towns and 
cities frequently have ordinances on the subject. 
As for example, in Savannah, in 1818, the public 
journals announced as follows: 

" The City has passed an ordinance by which any 
person that teaches any person of color ^ slave or free^ to 
read or lorite, or causes such persons to be so taught, 
is subjected to a fine of thirty dollars for each of- 
fense ; and every person of color who shall keep a 
school to teach reading or writing is subject to a fine 
of thirty dollars, or to be imprisoned ten days, and 
whipped thirty-nine lashes T 

"In North Carolina, to teach a slave to read or 
write, or sell or give him any book [Bible not ex- 
cepted] or pamphlet, is punished with thirty-nine 
lashes, or imprisonment, if the offender be a free 
negro ; but if a white, then with a fine of $200. 
The reason for this law, assigned in its preamble, is, 
that ' teaching slaves to read and write tends to dis- 
satisfaction in their minds, and to produce insurrec- 
tion and rebellion.'" (Jay's Inquiry, p. 136.) This 
was enacted in 1831. (Vide Child's Appeal.) 

" In Georgia, if a white teach a/;-ee negro or slave 
to write, he is fined $500, and imprisoned at the dis- 
14* 



822 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

cretion of the Court; if tlie offender be a colored 
man, bond or free, he may be fined or whipped, at 
the discretion of the Court. Of course, a father 
may be flogged for teaching his own child. This 
barbarous law was enacted in 1829.'' (lb.) 

" In Louisiana, the penalty for teaching slaves to 
read and write is one year's imprisonment." (lb.) 

The following statement will be regarded with 
interest, as being from one of the highest legal au- 
thorities : 

"In Georgia, by Act of 1829, no person is per- 
mitted to teach a slave, negro, or free person of 
color to read or write. So in Virginia, by statute, 
in 1830, meetings of free negroes to learn reading 
and Avriting are unlaAvful, and subject them to cor- 
j)oral punishment ; and it is unlawful for white per- 
sons to assemble with free negroes or slaves, to teach 
them to read or write. The prohibitory Act of the 
Legislature of Alabama, passed in the session of 
1831-2, relative to instruction to be given to the 
slave or free colored population, or exhortation or 
preaching to them, or any mischievous influence 
attempted to be exerted over them, is sufficiently 
penal. Laws of similar import are presumed to 
exist in the other slaveholdiug States ; but in Louis- 
iana, the law is armed with tenfold severity. It not 
only forbids any person teaching slaves to read or 
write, but it declares, that any person using language 
in any public discourse, from the bar, bench, stage, 
or pulpit, or in any other place, or in any private 
conversation, or making use of any signs or actions 



LEARNIXG FORBIDDEN. 323 

having a tendency to produce discontent among the 
free colored population, or insubordination among 
the slaves, or who shall be knowingly instrumental 
in bringing into the State any paper, book, or 
pamphlet, having the like tendency, shall, on con- 
viction, be punished with imprisonment or death, at 
the discretion of the Court." (Kent's Commentaries, 
vol. ii., part iv., p. 268, note.) 

Bible Societies do not distribute the Bible among 
slaves, because it is prohibited, and because the 
slaves are unable to read. 

John Woolman, of New-Jersey, (1757,) said : — 
^'■Some of our Society," (Friends,) " and some of the 
Society called New Lights, use some endeavors to 
instruct those [slaves] they have, in reading ; but in 
common this is not only neglected, but disapproved." 
(Journal of Life, &c., of Woolman, p. 74.) 

In the House of Delegates of Virginia, in 1832, 
Mr. Berry said: " We have, as far as j^ossible, closed 
every avenue by which light might enter their [the 
slaves'] minds. If we could extinguish the capacity 
to see the light, our work would be completed ; they 
would then be on a level with the beasts of the 
field, and we should be safe ! I am not certain that 
we would not do it, if we could find out the pro- 
cess, and that on the plea of necessity." 

Kentucky is one of the few slave States (perhaps 
the only one except Maryland) in which slave edu- 
cation is not expressly prohibited ; but the condition 
of the slave there was thus described by the Pres- 
byterian Synod of Kentucky, in 1834 " Slavery 



824 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

dooms thousands of human beings to hopeless igno- 
ranceJ^ "If slaves are educated, it must involve 
some outlay on the part of the master." " It is 
inconsistent with our knowledge of human nature 
to suppose that he will do this for them. The pres- 
ent state of instruction among this race answers 
exactly to what we might thus naturally antici- 
pate. Throughout the ivhole land, so far as we can 
learn, there is but one school in which, during the 
week, slaves can be taught. The light of three or 
four Sahbath-schools is seen glimmering through the 
darkness that covers the black population of a 
whole State. Mere and there, a family is found where 
humanity and religion impel the master, mistress^ or 
children to the laborious task of private instruc- 
tion." " Nor is it to be expected that thLs state of 
things will become better, unless it is determined that 
slavery shall ceased (Address, &c., p. 8.) 

In North Carolina, the "patrols" were ordered to 
" search every negro house for books or prints of 
any kind. Bibles and hymn books were particularly 
mentioned." (WekVs "Slavery as it is," p. 51.) 

The appeals and statements made by clergymen, 
missionaries and others, concerning the religious in- 
struction of slaves, arc usually guarded from misap- 
prehension by the use of the phrase ^^oral instruc- 
tion,^'' indicating that boohs are not to be put into 
their hands! "A Sabbath-school" for colored chil- 
dren at the South, commonly includes nothing more. 
Forgetful of their anathemas of the Church or Pope 
of Eome for withholding the Scriptures, most Pro- 



LEARNING FORBIDDEN. 825 

testant ministers at the Soutli, and some at the 
North, insist that mere "oral instruction" will an- 
swer very well for the negroes ! And this introduces 
to us the subject of our next chapter. 



CHAPTER YII. 

FREE SOCIAL WORSHIP AXD RELIGIOUS IXSTRUCTION' 
PROHIBITED. 

The Government not only permits the Master to forbid the free Social Worship 
and Religious Instruction of his Slaves, at his pleasure, b\it it also steps 
in with direct prohibitions of its own, which even the Master himself may 
not relax or abrogate. 

It is quite remarkable, that all tlie real practical 
restraints wliicli the Slave Codes of the South throw 
around the slave master, are obviously for the pui-- 
pose of withholding him from some exercise of hu- 
manity or of j ustice towards the slave ; not one of 
them is for the purjDOse of restraining him from in- 
humanity and injustice ! 

From no act of barbarity, cruelty, or even mur- 
der, is he in reality restrained. The enactments 
professing to have that object, we have found to be 
ineffectual, impossible to execute, deceptive, self- 
contradictory, and, in fact, sheer preteiise ! "We have 
found no laws that even professed to guard the 
highest interests of slaves as human beings, family 
sanctities, female chastity, education, religious de- 



RELIGION PROSCRIBED. 327 

velopment. No restraints upon the violation and 
destruction of these are attempted to be thrown 
around the slave master. But, on the other hand, 
he is restrained, as has been shown, from allowing 
to his slave (for the mutual benefit of both parties) 
a peculium of property from a tithe of his own 
earnings, with the benefits of "hiring out" for that 
purpose ! He is restrained, as we have seen, from 
bestowing upon his slave an education that would 
increase his usefulness, or of employing him to do 
any kind of writing! The slave maybe "used" 
so as to be " used up'' in seven years; may be used as 
a '•'■'breeder^'' as a prostitute, as a concubine, as a 
pimp, as a tapster, as an attendant at the gaming- 
table, as a subject of medical and surgical experi- 
ments for the benefit of science, and the Legislature 
makes no objections against it! But he may not be 
used as a clerk! In all this^ the master's absolute 
right of ownership is restrained 1 It is restrained 
too, as we shall see, by not permitting even the 
master to allow his slave the privileges of free social 
worship and religious instruction, well calculated as 
these privileges may be to increase in him those 
Christian virtues for which he is sometimes com- 
mended in advertisements, to enhance his value in 
the market ! The master's right we shall also find 
restrained by the laws forbidding him freely, and at 
self discretion, to emancipate ! The great solicitude 
of the law seems to be, to prevent the master from 
being too kind to his slave 1 

The philosophy of this is readily seen. A minority 



828 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

of slave owners are deemed exposed to tlie weakness 
of exercising some humanity and justice, of manifest- 
ing some feeling of responsibility to God in their 
treatment of their fellow-men! The majority of 
slaveholders, who make the laws, will not tolerate 
this! They enter, fully and understandingly, into 
the spirit of slave ownership. That " legal relation " 
must be preserved at all hazards ; and they know it 
is endangered by humanity, by justice, b}^ education, 
and by religion. They know that if others eman- 
cipate, their own tenure will be weakened. The rise 
of an oppressive oligarchy of slave owners begins 
here. And religious liberty is the very last thing 
to be tolerated by it. Eeligious liberty is the pre- 
cursor of civil and political liberty and enfranchise- 
ment, and must be suppressed. The gospel ^oould 
indeed abolish American slavery, (as is often said,) 
if it could only be introduced among the slaves so 
far as to confer upon them religious liberty. This 
our American slaveholders understand, as will now 
be shown. 

In Georgia, by an Act of Dec. 13, 1792, with the 
title, " To PROTECT religious societies in the exercise 
of their religious duties," it is required of every jus- 
tice of the peace, &c., to take into custody any person 
who shall interrupt or disturb a congregation of 
WHITE PERSONS, &c., assembled at any church, &c., 
and to impose a fine on the offender ; and in default of 
payment he may be imprisoned, &c., &c. Yet the same 
law concludes with these words: "No congregation 
or company of negroes shall, under pretense of divine 



EELIGION PROSCRIBED. 329 

worship^ assemble themselves, contrary to the Act 
regulatmg patrols." (Prince's Digest, 342.) 

This Act regulating patrols is understood to be 
the Act of May 10, 1770, "for ordering and govern- 
ing slaves," wherein slaves are forbidden to assemble 
"on pretense of feasting," &c., and "any constable," 
on direction of a justice, is commanded to disperse 
ANY assembly or vieeting of slaves which may disturb 
the peace or endanger the safety of his Majesty's 
subjects; and every slave which may be found at 
such meeting, as aforesaid, shall and may, by order 
of such justice, immediately he corrected^ without 
TRIAL, hy receiving on the hare hacJc twenty-five stripes 
ivith a tchip^ switch, or cowskin,^^ &c. (Prince's Di- 
gest, 447.) From the general terms of this Act, 
there can be no doubt that it was applicable to 
religious meetings before the Act of 1792 occasioned 
its reiteration with more distinct specifications. 

In South Carolina, in the same Act of 1800, al- 
ready cited as forbidding " slaves, free negroes, mu- 
lattoes, and mestizoes" to assemble for "mental 
instruction," there is the following additional section : 

"It shall not be lawful for any number of slaves, 
free negroes, mulattoes, or mestizoes, even in company 
with white persons^ to meet together and assemble for 
the purpose of mental instruction or religious luor- 
ship, either before the rising of the sun or after the 
going down of the same. And all magistrates, 
sheriffs, militia officers, &c., &c., are hereby vested 
with power, &c., for dispersing such assemhliesJ^ (2 
Brevard's Digest, 254-5.) "Three years afterwards, 



330 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

upon petition, as the Act recites, of certain religious 
societies, the rigor of the Act of 1800 was slightly 
abated, by a modification which forbids an}- person, 
before nine o'clock in the evening, "to break into a 
place of meeting wherein shall be assembled the 
members of any religious society in this State, pro- 
vided a majority of them shall he ivliite liersons^ or 
otherwise to disturb their devotion, unless such per- 
son, &c., so entering said place [of worship] shall 
first have obtained from some magistrate, &c., a war- 
rant, kc, in case a magistrate shall be then actually 
within a distance of three miles from such place of 
meeting ; otherwise the provisions, &c., [of the Act 
of 1800,] to remain in full force." (Brevard's Di- 
gest, 261. Stroud's Sketch, pp. 93-1.) 

So that, in order to attend a religious meeting 
securely, the slave must hiow beforehand (1st) that 
there will be present "a majority of white persons; 
(2d,) that there will be no person there with "a war- 
raiit^^ from a justice to apprehend him; and (3d) 
that a justice will not "Z)e then'' within three miles' 
distance ! For a mistake in either of these particu- 
lars, he (or she) is subjected to the penalty of 
" twenty -five lashes with the cowskin on the bare 
back, well laid on !" 

" In Virginia, all evening meetings of slaves at 
any meeting-house arc unequivocally forbidden." 
(Jay's Inquiry, p. 137. See Stroud, p. 9-4. See 
also 1 Revised Code (of 1819), 421r-5, already cited 
(Chap. VI.) as prohibiting meetings for promoting 
education.) The first clause will be found to prohibit 



RELIGION PROSCRIBED. 331 

^'all meetings" of slaves, &c., in the evening. "Slaves 
may, liowever, attend at cliurcli on any day of public 
worship." (Stroud, p. 94.) 

Mississippi — same as Virginia, witli a proviso that 
a master may permit his slave to attend the preach- 
ing of a white minister, regularly ordained and li- 
censed, or where at least two discreet and respectable 
white persons, appointed by some regular church, 
shall attend. (Mississippi Rev. Code, 390. Stroud's 
Sketch, p. 94. Jay's Inquiry, p. 137.) 

Religious liberty secures the right of the worship- 
pers to choose and arrange their own modes and forms 
of religious worship, and to select their own teachers ; 
not the privilege of being permitted to worship when, 
where, and how the Government or a slaveholder 
may appoint, and under such religious teachers as 
they may select. The essence of spiritual despotism 
and of religious persecution lies in the enforcement 
of such claims. It is no discredit to the slaves that 
they have little or no desire to hear religioiis ha- 
rangues from their oppressors, or that they loathe 
the instructions of ministers who preach the right- 
fulness of slaveholding. 

The Southampton slave insurrection of Nat. Turner 
(once a preacher) may have furnished a pretext for 
the following: 

"The Legislature of Virginia passed a law in 
1831, by which any free colored person who under- 
takes to preach or conduct a rchgious meeting by 
day or night may be whipped, not exceeding thirty- 
nine lashes, at the discretion of any justice of the 



332 TnE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

peace ; and any body raa}^ appreliend any sucli free 
colored person ivUhoid a icarrant. The same penalty, 
adjudged and executed in the same way, falls on any 
slave or free colored person who attends such joreach- 
ing ; and any slave who listens to any luhite preacher 
in the night-time receives the same punishment. The 
same law prevails in Georgia and Mississippi. A 
master may permit a slave to preach on his planta- 
tion, to none but //is slaves." (Child's Appeal, p. 67.) 

An early law of Maryland, (Act of 1715, chap. 44, 
sec. 23,) and a similar one in South Carolina, (in 
1711,) permits tlie hapiism of slaves, but carefully 
provides that " such baptism shall not be construed 
to effect the emancipation of any slave." This arose 
from a contrary apprehension growing out of ancient 
usages in England, and the opinion of some jurists 
that Christians could not be lawfully enslaved. 

In Louisiana the Legislature enacted : "It shall 
be the duty of every owner to procure his sick slaves 
all kinds of temporal and spiritual assistance which 
their situation may require." (1 Martin's Dig., 610.) 

These Maryland and Louisiana privileges of bap- 
tism at birth, and of extreme unction on a death- 
bed, apparently of Roman Catholic origin, were 
undoubtedly considered great kindnesses; and they 
constitute, to this day, almost, if not entirely, the 
sum total of the legal provision for the slave as a 
religious being. 

The prohibitions recorded in this chapter have 
found their defense or apology in the alleged dangers 
of insurrection and insubordination ! The plea is 



RELIGION PROSCRIBED. 333 

strongly condemnatorj' of the system, its apologists, 
and its administrators! Of no system but an ini- 
quitous one could it be true that religious liberty 
would array and arm its subjects against its funda- 
mental law ! No right-minded person, who was at 
heart neither a slave nor a tyrant, would ever urge 
such a plea. And if the slaveholders treated their 
servants justly and kindly, the danger of insurrection 
would cease. The plea, if false, should itself be 
execrated. If founded on a real danger, it reveals 
the inherent and inexpressible wickedness of slave- 
holding, and of the so-called "legal relation" that 
suvstains it, and that is itself maintained at such a 
sacrifice! The "necessity" of such laws, rightly in- 
terpreted, resolves itself into the necessity of " imme- 
diate and unconditional abolition." 

The general condition of the slaves is not better 
than is indicated by these enactments. We have not 
room to present a full specimen of Southern testi- 
mony on this subject. 

The Presbyterian Synod of Kentucky, in 1834, 
said: " Slavery deprives its subjects, in a great mea- 
sure, of the privileges of the gospel." " The law, 
as it is here, does not prevent free access to the Scrip- 
tures ; but ignorance, the natural result of their con- 
dition, does. The Bible is before them. But it is, 
to them, a sealed book. Very few of them enjoy the 
advantages of a regular gospel ministry." 

The Address of the Synod proceeds to say that 
some have proposed missionaries among slaves, but 
adds that the ^'communitif Avill never sustain this 



334 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

measure until tlicy are " rijje for measures for emanci- 
pation.'^ They add : " It is evident that, as a body, 
our slaves do not enjoy the public ordinances of re- 
ligion. Domestic means of grace are still more rare 
among them." 

From a sermon of Bishop Meade, it may be in- 
ferred that the religious 'condition of slaves is not 
better in Virginia. 

The Presbyterian Synod of South Carolina and 
Georgia, in 1833, published a statement in which 
they said of the slaves: "There are over two mil- 
lions of human beings in the condition of heathen, 
and some of them in a worse condition." " They 
may justly be considered the heathen of this coun- 
try, and will bear a comparison with heathen in any 
country in the world. TJie negroes are destitute of the 
gospel, and ever WILL BE under the present state of 
things. In the vast field extending from an entire 
State beyond the Potomac [i. e., Maryland] to the 
Sabine Kiver, [at that time our South-western boun- 
dary,] and from the Atlantic to the Ohio, there are, 
to the best of our knowledge, not twelve men exclu- 
sively devoted to the religious instruction of the 
negroes. In the present state of feeling in the 
South, a ministry of their own color could neither be 
obtained nor tolerated. But do not the negroes 
have access to the gosjDcl through the stated ministry 
of the whites ? We answer, No. The negroes have 
no regular and efficient ministry: as a matter of 
course, no churches ; neither is there sufficient room 
in the white churches for their accommodation. 



RELIGION PROSCRIBED. 335 

"We know of but five churches in the slaveholding 
States, built expressly for their use. These are all 
in the State of Georgia. We may now inquire whe- 
ther they enjoy the privileges of the gospel<in their 
own houses, and on our plantations? Again we re- 
turn a negative answer. They have no Bibles to read 
by their own firesides. They ha)^e no family altars ; 
and when in affliction, sickness, or death, they have 
no minister to address to them the consolations of 
the gospel, nor to bury them with appropriate ser- 
vices." 

Again, in 1834, the same Synod said : 
"The gospel, as things now are^ can never be 
preached to the two classes [whites and blacks] suc- 
cessfully in conjunction." " The galleries or back 
seats on the lower floor of ivhite churches are gene- 
rally appropriated to the negroes, when it can be 
done without inconvenience to the whites. When 
it cannot be done conveniently, the negroes must 
catch the gospel as it escapes through the doors and 
windows." " If the master is pious, the house servants 
alone attend family worship, and frequently feio or 
none of them^ " So far as masters are engaged in 
the work, [of religious instruction of slaves,] an al- 
most unbroken silence reigns on this vast field." 

The Charleston (S. C.) Observer, and the Western 
Luminary, Lexington, (Ky.,) fully corroborate these 
statements. So also does Kev. C. C. Jones, of Georgia, 
who says further: "We cannot cry out against the 
Papists for withholding the Scriptures from the com- 
mon people, and keeping them in ignorance of the 



836 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

way of life, for we luithholcl the Bible from our ser- 
vantSj and keep them in ignorance of it, while we will 
not use the means to have it read and explained to 
them." 

The North Carolina Baptist Convention adopted 
a Eeport concerning the religious instruction of the 
colored people, with a series of Resolutions, con- 
cluding as follows: ^'- Resolved^ That bj religious in- 
struction be understood VERBAL communications 
on religious subjects !" 

But not even verbal instructions, it seems, could 
be tolerated in South Carolina. In 1838, the Method- 
ist Conference of South Carolina appointed a mis- 
sionarv. Rev. Mr. Turpin, to labor among the colored 
people, but it was soon suppressed by the principal 
citizens. The Greenville (S. C.) Mountaineer of Nov. 
2, 1838, contained the particulars. A Committee 
was appointed, who addressed a note to Mr. Turpin, 
requesting him to desist. This was backed up by a 
Remonstrance to the same effect, signed by James S. 
Pope and 352 others. The document is before us. 
It argues at length the incompatibility of slavery 
with the " mental improvement and religious instruc- 
tion" of slaves. " Verbal instruction," say they, " will 
increase the desire of the black population to learn. 
We know of upwards of a dozen negroes in the 
neighborhood of Cambridge Avho can now read, some 
of whom are members of your societies at Mount 
Lebanon and New-Salem. Of course, when they see 
themselves encouraged, theij icill supply themselves 
with Bibles, hymn hooks, and Catechisms'\f "Open 



KELIGION PROSCRIBED. 337 

the missionary sluice, and the current will swell in 
its gradual onward advance. We thus expect that 
a progressive system of improvement icill he introduced, 
or will follow, from the nature and force of circum- 
stances, and, if not checked, (though they may be 
shrouded in sophistry and disguise,) ivill idt'miately 
revolutionize our civil institutions. ''"' " We consider the 
common adage that 'Knowledge is power,' and as 
the colored man is enlightened, his condition will 
be rendered more unhapp}^ and intolerable. Intelli- 
gence and slavery have no affinity with each others The 
document refers to the laws of the State, and hopes 
that " South Carolina is yet true to her vital interests," 
&c., &c. 

The missionary enterprise was thus suppressed, or 
was relinquished. The Editor of the Mountaineer 
said : " The opposition to the late Home Mission 
among us comprised the great bod}^ of the people." 

^^No people are found to he hetter than their laios.^^ 

" The legal relation" of slave ownership, as under- 
stood at the South, requires all this. And the Church 
and ministry there either acquiesce or succumb ! 

At every point we have found an utter repugnance 
and opposition between the Slave Code and the 
Christian religion. And the Slave Code is nothing 
more nor less than the truthful exponent and the 
vigilant guardian of the so-called " legal relation of 
master and slave." While the one remains, the other 
remains, with all the practical results that naturally 
grow out of them. 

15 



CHAPTER VIII. 

LEGISLATIVE, JUDICIAL, i\:N'D COXSTITUTIOXAL 
OBSTRUCTIONS TO EMAIS'CIPATIOX. 

The Statutes of the Slave States not only make no provision for a general 
Emancipation, but they obstruct and prevent Emancipations by the Master. 
And the Constitutions of some of the States forbid the Legislatures to abolish 
Slavery. 

We have seen that slavery is hereditary and per- 
petual in the nature of its tenure, and that the code 
by which it is defined contemplates no period of its 
termination, and points out no conditions upon which 
the slave or his posterity can escape from it. (See 
Chap. XXI. of the former series.) One avenue of 
hope only remains for him. The slave master may 
himself emancipate. In very many instances, slave 
masters have done so. The hope has been thus in- 
spired of such an increase of manumissions as should 
weaken and ultimately terminate the whole system. 

The hopes of humanity, in this direction, have not 
outrun the fears of the majority of slaveholders, who 
control the legislation of the slave States. The 
laws accordingly interpose obstacles to emancipation. 

The reasons uro;ed at the South for legislative and 



LAWS VS. MANUMISSION. 339 

judicial restrictions upon emancipation cannot, per- 
haps, be more favorably or more forcibly stated than 
in the following extract from a note by Mr. Wheeler, 
at the close of his chapter of reported cases concern- 
ing "the emancipation of slaves:" 

" It will be seen by this chapter that the owner of 
slaves may emancipate them by deed, will, or contract 
executed. But to this benevolence of iheoiuner there 
are, in most of the States, EESTRAINTS upon the exercise 
of this power hi/ the owner. Slaves are recognized, 
wherever this system is tolerated, as propierty, and are 
subject to all the rules in the acquisition, possession, 
and transmission of property. It would seem, there- 
fore, upon a first view of the case, that the owner should 
do iviili his property whatever he pleased, and should 
have the privilege of renouncing his right to it when- 
ever he pleased, and without being qualified by any 
public laws or regulations on the subject. Such, 
however, is not the fact; restraints upon this right 
exist in nearly all the States." 

After citing some of the laws on the subject, in- 
cluding those of Tennessee and Alabama, which we 
shall copy, Mr. Wheeler proceeds : 

"When it is considered that slaves are a p)eculiar 
species of property, it will not excite surprise that 
laws are necessary for their regulation, and to protect 
society from even the benevolence of slave owners, in 
throwing upon the community a great number of 
stupid, ignorant, and vicious persons, to disturb its 
peace and endanger its permanency. 

"The right of society to regulate and control the 



340 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

ownership and control of this kind of property may 
be justified on the same grounds as some other 
species of property. No one can doubt the right 
of individuals to acquu'e, possess, and sell gun- 
powder. But if the possessor chooses to take it to 
his house or store, in a city or populous town, the 
public become interested, and will restrain him within 
reasonable and proper limits."^ "And the consti- 
tutionality of such laws cannot be doubted. So of 
slaves. The owner may keep as many as he pleases, 
but if he emancipates them, and turns them loose 
upon society, they have a right to protect themselves 
against his improvidence, or even against his bene- 
volence and generosity. They have a right to 
declare the act illegal, or restrain it within such 
bounds as shall secure their safety." (Wheeler's 
Law of Slavery, pp. 386-8.) 

In Mr. Wheeler's book we have met with no men- 
tion of the laws forbidding the education of slaves and 
free colored people^ and their free access to the means 
of religious and moral instruction. By the side of 
such laws, the plea for laws restraining emancipation 
on the ground of the ignorance and vice of the 
colored people, would have seemed incongruous. 
It is the intelligence and virtue of the colored race 



* To have m:iJe the cases parallel, the writer shouhl liavo 
aJduce<l laws restraining owners of slaves from having too many 
of them in one place, or else lie slioulJ liave cited laws restraining 
owners of gitnpowdei' from pouring water upon it, or from trans- 
muting it into articles that could endanger nobody ! It is slavery^ 
and not liberty, that is " dangerous." 



LAWS VS. MANUMISSION. 341 

that constitute the "danger" to be guarded against 
in this feature of slave legislation and jurisprudence. 
And the honesty and conscientious inisgivings of re- 
penting slaveholders (quite as truly as their "be- 
nevolence and generosity") constitute another danger 
against which a "society" of slaveholders thus pro- 
tects itself 

This principle of restriction obtains in the code of 
nearly every one of the slave States, though an ex- 
press enactment cannot always be cited for it. 

In South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, and Ala- 
bama, the Legislature only^ by express enactments, 
have authority to emancipate slaves. (Vide author- 
ities cited by Stroud, p. l-iT.) 

In North Carolina, a slave cannot be emancipated 
except for meritorious services, to be adjudged and 
allowed of by the Court. (Haywood's Manual, 537, 
Act of 1796.) 

A general principle, pervading the legislation and 
jurisprudence of the several States, is, that the owner 
may not emancipate without the consent of his 
croditors. Thus, " in Yirginia and Mississippi, an 
emancipated slave may be taken in execution to 
satisfy any debt contracted by the person emancipat- 
ing him, previous to such emancipation." (1 Eev. 
Code of Virginia, 434. Mississippi Eev. Code, 386.) 

In Kentucky, the emancipating papers must con- 
tain a saving of the rights of creditors. (2 Litt. and 
Swi., 1155.) 

In Louisiana, "any enfranchisement made in fraud 
of creditors is void." (New Civil Code, art. 190.) 



842 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

In Virginia, Mississippi, and Kentucky, tlie widou 
of a deceased slaveliolder, who may have emanci- 
pated a slave, may claim her '■'■ third^^ to which the 
widow is entitled. (1 Rev. Code of Virginia, 435. 
Mississippi Rev. Code, 886. 2 Litt. and Swi., 1246.) 
And when one third -part of an emancipated slave is 
thus reenslaved, the problem of preserving the re- 
maining two thirds of him in a state of freedom would 
perhaps puzzle his best legal advisers ! 

In Georgia, "^/ie attempt" to set free a slave, other- 
wise than by application to the Legislature, is pun- 
ished as an ^^ offense" — a fine of two hundred dollars, 
one half to the informer and the other half to the 
county ; and the manumitted slave is retained in 
slavery. (Prince's Digest, 457.) And, as if this 
were not sufhcient, an additional Act, in 1818, de- 
clares that every last will and testament by which 
slaves shall be set free, or any such will or other 
"instrument in writing, or by parol," by which 
slaves shall be allowed the privilege of working for 
themselves, "to be utterly null and void." And 
the person executing such writing, or "attempting 
to give it eifect," or "accepting a trust" under it, 
may be fined "not exceeding one thousand dollars ;" 
and every slave "on whose behalf" such instrument 
shall be written, " being thereof convicted^ {?/) shall be 
sold at public outcry, and the proceeds appropriated," 
&c. (Prince's Digest, 466.) 

In Tennessee, the Courts, on petition of the oimer, 
and for sufficient reasons therein set foi'th, 7yiay eman- 
cipate a slave ! (Tenn. Laws ; Act of 1801, chap. 27.) 



LAWS VS. MANUMISSION. 343 

" Emancipatiou is guarded in Tennessee by a pro- 
vision (statute of 1777) that the State must assent, or 
the act of manumission by deed or will is ineffectual ; 
and (as appears in Fisher vs. Dabbs, 6 Yerger's Rep., 
119,) the emancipated slave must be immediately 
removed beyond the limits of the United States." 
(Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 387.) 

" By statute of Alabama, Aikin's Dig., 617, slaves 
may be emancipated by the master, on application 
to the County Court, and on proof of meritorious ser- 
vices, but the slave must remove out of the limits 
of the State." (lb.) 

Mississippi has combined all the obstacles in the 
laws of all the other States. (Stroud, p. 149.) 

Kentucky, Missouri, Virginia, and Maryland, afford 
greater facilities for emancipation. (lb.) In Ken- 
tucky and Missouri the master may emancipate, 
" saving the rights of creditors," and by giving bonds 
for the maintenance of the aged and infirm. 

In Virginia the law is similar, onl}^ that if the 
emancipated slave be over twenty-one years of age, 
he must leave the State in one year, or be reen- 
slaved! (Revised Code, 436.) 

Maryland has a proviso that the emancipated slave 
shall be "of healthy constitution," &c., "capable of 
labor," and "not exceeding forty-five years of age." 
(Laws of 1796, chap. 67.) 

In Louisiana, "no one can emancipate his slave, 
unless the slave has attained the age of thirt}^ years, 
and has behaved well for at least four years preced- 
ing his emancipation." But " a slave who has saved 



344 THE AMERICAN" SLAVE CODE, 

tlie life of his master, his master's wife, or one of his 
cliildren, may be emancipated at any age." (Art. 
185, 186.) Also, tlic cliild of a deceased slave mother 
who had acquired the right to freedom at a future 
time, becomes free at that time. (Art. 196.) And a 
slave entitled to a future release is capable of receiv- 
ing projDerty by testament or donation. (Art. 193.) 
For these remnants of justice and mercy, humanity 
is indebted, perhaps, to the former usages of the 
French and Spaniards, under the Code Noir. 

From the legislators we now turn to the judges 
and reporters of judicial decisions. 

" With respect to emancipation, it may be stated 
as a principle without an exception, that, as slaves 
are considered property upon which creditors have a 
right to look for the payment of their debts due by 
the owner of slaves, regard must be had to the nghts 
of the creditor ; and no act of emancipation is valid 
when these are violated." (Note, in Wheeler's Law 
of Slavery, p. 310.) 

So then the slave, by extraordinary exertions and 
by agreement witli his master, may have obtained 
emancipation for lumself and family, and may have 
removed with them to a free State. Yet the master's 
creditor may take out an execution, and reenslave 
them, by the help of the Fugitive Slave Act of Con- 
gress. The money paid by the slave docs not con- 
stitute him a creditor, in the eye of the law ; for it 
belonged, in lau\ to the master, before it was paid to 
him ! 

" Slaves manumitted by Will, where the i^^^'sonal 



LAWS VS. MANUMISSION. 845 

estate is not sufficient to pay the debts of the testator, 
are not entitled to freedom." This is the marginal 
note to the case of Negro George et al. vs. Corse, 
Adm'r. ; June T., 1827. (2 Harris and Gill's Md. 
Eep., 1.) 

The Will of James Corse, manumitting the slaves, 
contained the following : "And it is hereby provided 
that if my personal estate^ EXCLUSIVE OF NEGROES, 
should not be sufficient to discharge all my just 
debts, then my will is that my executor or ad- 
ministrator, as the case may be, may sell so much of 
my real estate as ivill pay my dehts^ so as to have my 
negroes free, as before stated." 

" It was admitted that the personal estate of the 
testator, either including or excluding the negroes, 
was not, at the time of his death, or at any time 
since, sufficient to pay his debts; but that his real 
estate, including his personal property, and exclud- 
ing the negroes, were, at the time of his death, and 
still are, sufficient to pay his debts. Verdict for de- 
fendants, and petitioners appealed. After argument, 
the Court, Dorsey^ Archer^ and Earl., Judges, affirmed 
the judgment, and that the creditors had a right to 
their demands out of the j^ersonal estate." (Wheeler, 
pp. 327-8.) 

Thus the Court annulled the express provisions 
of the Will, whether with or without authority from 
the statute, docs not appear. And the princijole 
established would, in the same manner, set aside a 
similar Will of a testator who might leave millions 
in 1-eal estate, if his personal estate, exclusive of 
15* 



346 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

negroes, should fall short of paying his debts. The 
object and spirit of such decisions cannot be hid. 
The rights of the free as well as of the enslaved are 
outrageously infringed by such proceedings, in which 
the death-bed promptings of conscience, repentance, 
justice, and mercy, are profanely spurned and tram- 
pled in the dust. 

" Slaves are subject to dower in all the States. Not 
only are they subject to dower, but the widow's in- 
terest in them is protected by statutory provisions. 
If the husband manumits his slaves, whereby cre- 
ditors and the dower of the widow are affected, the 
manumission is so far ineffectual that the manumitted 
slaves may be sold for a pe^'iod, and the proceeds of 
the sale applied to the creditors of the former owner 
and his widow." [Numerous authorities cited.] 
(Wheeler, note to p. 181.) 

In other circumstances the coui'ts are less regardful 
of the rights of woman. 

"A wife's estate in dower of slaves, by a former 
husband, on her second marriage, rests in her hus- 
band." ^^And her right to manumit them is gone^ 
(Wheeler, p. 182.) 

On the subject of the validity of contracts and 
promises of masters to manumit, there seems some 
slight diversity among the judges, as will be seen 
from the following, in which the general doctrine is 
apparent : 

"A written agreement by a master with his slave 
to manumit him is obligatory ; it rests in benevolence, 
not in contract.'' (Marginal Note.) The Judge said : 



LAWS VS. MANUMISSION. 347 

"The manumission of a slave does not rest upon the 
principle of a contract, depending upon a considera- 
tion ; but it is an act of benevolence sanctioned by the 
statute, and made obligatory, if in ivritingJ'' (Kettletas 
vs. Fleet, Feb. T., 1811 ; 7 John's New- York Kep., 
824. Wheeler, p. 232.) 

" Chancery cannot enforce a contract between mas- 
ter and slave, though the slave perform his part." 
(Stevenson vs. Singleton, Feb. T., 1829 ; 1 Leigh's 
Va. Rep., 72. Wheeler, p. 233.) 

Same decision in Sawney vs. Carter, March Term, 
1828 ; 6 Randolph's Ya. Rep., 173. Wheeler, p. 237. 
Cited in Leigh's Rep. I. 72, Virg., 1829, as follows : 

"Application to enforce a contract between master 
and slave. — Per Cur. : In the case of Sawney vs. Car- 
ter, the Court refused, on great consideration, to en- 
force a promise by a master to emancipate his slave 
where the conditions of the promise had been partly 
complied with by the slave. The Court proceeded 
on the principle that it is not competent to a Court 
of Chancery to enforce a contract between master 
and slave, even although the contract should he fully 
complied with on the part of the slave." 

Fugitive slaves, on arriving at the North, have 
sometimes exhibited the written agreements of their 
masters to emancipate them, on condition of their 
payment of a certain specified amount of money, 
payable in instalments. Along with these, they have 
exhibited the receipts of their masters for the several 
instalments in full. And yet they have been com- 
pelled to run away to obtain their hard-earned free- 



348 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

dom, witli all the hazards of being hunted and re- 
captured ! The writer has seen and examined such 
documents. 

"If an informal emancipation takes place, the 
master promising to comply with the legal formali- 
ties, his rights are not thereby affected before the 
formahties be observed." (Bazzy vs. Rose and 
child. May T., 1820; 8 Martin's Louisiana Rep., 
149. Wheeler, p. 307.) In this case, the promise, 
in writing, was produced. On a habeas corpus, the 
slaves (Rose and child) had been discharged, as free 
persons. But the claimant, Bazzi, brought this suit 
against them, and the Court, Martin, J., decreed them 
to be slaves of the plaintiff! 

"A contract to manumit is obligatory." (Case of 
Negro Tom, Feb. T., 1810 ; 5 John's New- York Rep., 
365. Wheeler, p. 309.) 

"iVb declaration or promise made to a slave can 
be enforced in a Court of law." (Marginal note.) 

Beall vs. Joseph. Trespass to try Joseph's right 
to freedom. He had been a slave to one Woods, 
who agreed to let Edwards have him for four years, 
after which he ivas to he free. Both Woods and 
Edwards made parol declarations to this effect. But 
Edwards sold him a slave to Beall. The Judge 
said, "It is clear that no declaration or promise 
made to the slave in this State, (Kentucky,) or for 
his benefit, by the OAvner or any other person, can 
be enforced in a Court of law or e<iuitij. And see 
Will vs. Thompson, in a note at the end of the case, 
where it was held, that wlxere a ruRCHASER in ivrit- 



LAWS VS. MANUMISSION. 349 

{7ig contracted loith the seller to vianumit the slave at 
a specified time^ it is not a ground for a suit at common 
law, but equity will enforce the contract^ and give 
DAMAGES for the detention of the negroP (Harden's 
Kj. Eep., 51. Wheeler, p. 331.) 

A contrary decision appears in Negro Cato vs. 
Howard. (June T., 180S ; 2 Har. and John's Md. 
Eep., 323. Wheeler, p. 323.) 

"Parol evidence of an agreement for the freedom 
of a slave is inadmissible." (Victoire vs. Dussuau, 
March T., 1S16; 4 Martin's Louisiana Eep., 212. 
Wheeler, p. 334.) 

"An infant cannot be emancipated," "nor can a 
slave be set free who is not both under the as^e of 
forty-five years, and able to ivork^ and gain a suffi- 
cient maintenance and livelihood, at the time the 
freedom is intended to commence." (Hamilton vs. 
Cragg, June T., 1823 ; 6 Har. and John's Md. Eep., 
16. Also Hall vs. Mullin, 5 Har. and John's Md. 
Eep., 190. Wheeler, p. 311.) 

"A bequest of liberty to slaves, in contravention 
of the law, is void." (Mary vs. Morris et al., Aug. 
T., 1834 ; 7 Lou. Eep., 135. Wheeler, p. 311.) 

"A deed of emancipation not recorded in the 
proper court, but in some other, gives no title to free- 
dom until properly recorded.''^ (Sawney vs. Carter, 
[before cited.] Also Givens vs. Mann, 6 Munf., Va. 
Eep., 191. Also Lewis vs. Fullerton, 1 Eandolph's 
Ya. Eep., 15. Wheeler, p. 238.) 

"Whether a slave, who is directed to be set free 
by the last will and testament of his master, can 



350 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

have the intervention of a magistrate to prevent his 
removal out of the State, quere^ (}*Iarginal note 
to Moosa vs. Allain, 16 Martin's Lou. Rep., 99. 
AVheeler, p. 817.) The testator, Julien Poydras, di- 
rected in his will, that his slaves on his several 
plantations should each be considered inseparable 
from the respective plantation on which they were, 
and that they should, at the end of twenty-live 
years, be free. The plaintiff was however sold, and 
taken to another plantation, against his will and 
consent, and, as he believed, with an intention of 
carrying him out of the State. He petitioned for a 
recession of the sale, and to be restored to the plan- 
tation where he belonged. There was judgment for 
the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed. Judgment 
affirmed ! 

"A slave cannot be emancipated by a nuncupative 
[verbal, declaratory] will, nor by an executory or 
conditional instrument in writing." (Cooke [col- 
ored] vs. Cooke ; 8 Littell's Ky. Rep., 236. Wheeler, 
p. 328.) 

Besides these legislative obstructions to emanci- 
pation by the masters, there are, in several of the 
States, constitutional provisions restraining the State 
Legislatures from abolishing slavery by statute. As 
the State will not intrust the planters with the 
power of manumission, so neither will the planters 
allow the State to hold the power of abolition. 

The laws forbidding or obstructing emancipation 
have been pleaded on behalf of the slaveholders, as 
an excuse for not emancipating their slaves. But 



LAWS VS. MANUMISSION. 351 

they can be of no avail, except to such as oppose 
those laws. Slaveholders, moreover, might give 
their slaves " a pass " to the borders of the free 
States, or accompany them thither. The fact that 
others will reenslave those whom they may emanci- 
pate cannot excuse them. They have no right to 
continue a wicked practice, because others would 
take it up if they relinquished it ! 

Concerning the law of Virginia reenslaving the 
emancipated negro, the Powhatan Colonization So- 
ciety (addressing the Virginia Legislature) said: 
" The law was doubtless dictated by sound policy, 
and its repeal would be regarded by none 11:1111 more 
unfeigned regret than hy the friends of African coloniza- 
tion. It has restrained many masters from giving free- 
dom to their slaves, and has thereby contributed to 
check the growth of an already TOO GREAT AND 
GROWING EVIL !" (Jay's Inquiry, p. 108.) 

It ill befits those \s\\o hold and who patronize this 
language, to cite the laws impeding emancipation, 
to justify slaveholders in refusing to emancipate I 
But this incongruity is constantly witnessed ! The 
popularity, at the South and at the North, of those 
Societies and statesmen and ministers of religion 
who hold such language and occupy such a position, 
may assist to throw light on the inquiry, whether, 
in this particular, the people are better than their 
laws. 

And let it be remembered that, in the judgment 
of those who ought to know, and who are directly 
interested in the matter, it is only by such laws that 



352 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

" tlie innocent legal relation" of slave ownersliip can 
be sustained. 

In Weld's "Slavery as it is," p. 164, may be found 
the particulars of the reenslavement of one hundred 
and thirty-four slaves in North Carolina, who had 
been liberated by the Quakers in 1776. The old 
law of 17-41 could not prevent it. In 1777, after 
the manumissions had taken place, a new law was 
made prohibiting such procedure, and the County 
Courts, under this Act, ordered the emancipated 
slaves to be sold into slavery ! The Superior Court, 
in 1778, reversed the decision, and the negroes were, 
a second time, set at liberty. But the Legislature, 
in 1779, confirmed the title of the purchasers by a 
special Act, and they were taken np, and a second 
time reduced to slavery ! A fair illustration of the 
legality of the "peculiar relation!" 

Such are the relations of the slave to civil govern- 
ment and to society ; such the protection he receives 
from them. 



PART III. 



RELATION OF THE SLAVE CODE TO THE LIBERTOS 
OF THE FREE. 



CHAPTER I. 

LIBERTIES OF THE FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 

The Free People of Color, though not in a condition of Chattelhood, are con- 
stantly exposed to it, and at best enjoy only a portion of their rights. 

We have already seen how, in many ways, a free 
colored person maybe enslaved. He may be enslaved 
for assisting a slave, however nearly related to him, 
to escape into freedom. He may be enslaved for being 
suspected of being himself a runaway slave ; for being 
thus imprisoned, and unable to pay his jail fees. He 
may be reenslaved, after having been emancipated, 
if the process were not in exact accordance with 
"unreasonable and vexatious regulations ; or if, how- 
ever regularly emancipated, he presumes to remain 
among his friends, and amid the scenes of his child- 
hood. He may be enslaved for incurring fines which 
he is unable to pa}', under unjust and unequal enact- 
ments. He may be enslaved for not being able, by 
white witnesses, to prove himself free ! Thougli a 
Northern man, and always before free, he may be 
enslaved by entering a slave State, (Georgia or Ma- 
ryland,) and thus incurring a fine and being unable 



356 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

to pay it. (Jay's Inquiry, 24. Child's Appeal, p. 64.) 
He may be enslaved, Avith his children after him, for 
being married to a slave. He may be enslaved by 
being unlawfully and piratically imported into a 
slave State, even though the kidnapper may be ar- 
rested and punished ! And in none of the free States 
can any free native colored citizen be safe from 
the operation of the Federal Fugitive Slave Bill of 
1850, and from the clutches of United States Mar- 
shals and Commissioners' The \sc^ 2yresumes him to 
be a slave imless he can prove himself free. (Wheel- 
er's Law of Slavery, pp. 6, 6.) " In South Carolina, 
if a free negro cross the line of the State, he can 
never return." (Child's Appeal, p. 68.) 

" MississijDpi, in 1831, passed a law to expel all 
[free] colored persons under sixty and over sixteen 
years of age, within ninety days, unless they could 
prove good characters, and obtain from the Court a 
certificate of the same, for which they paid three 
dollars : these certificates might be revoked at the 
discretion of the County Courts. If such persons do 
not quit the State within the time specified, or if 
they return to it, they may be sold for a term not 
exceeding five years." (lb., p. 68.) And persons sold 
for a term of years seldom regain their freedom, as 
has been ascertained in the District of Columbia. 

In Tennessee, emancipated slaves must leave the 
State forthwith. (lb., p. Q^.) 

^Yhile tracing, in the preceding chapters, the legal 
condition of the s/are, we have found the ^'free negro, 
mulatto, or mestizo," associated with him in some of 



FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 857 

the most painfully humiliating incidents of his de- 
gradation. Like the slave^ the free colored person 
is held incompetent to testify against a white man ! 
Like the slave, he is debarred, to a great extent, from 
the benefits of education, and from the right of enjoy- 
ing free social worship and religious instruction ! 
Like the slave, he is required to be passive, without 
exercising the right of self-defense, under the insults 
and assaults of the Avhite man ! Like the slave, as 
will be shown, he is denied the ordinary safeguards 
of an impartial trial by a jury of his peers. Like the 
slave, he has no vote nor voice in framing the laws 
under which he is governed. Even in many of the 
free States he exercises this right only on unequal 
conditions, or coupled with invidious distinctions ! 
And yet he is complimented with the title of "/ree.^" 
To be a " free negro'^ differs widely, it would seem, 
from being a free man ! 

For striking a white man, in Maryland, no matter 
for what cause, a Justice may "direct the offender's 
ears to be cropped, though he be a //-ee black." (Stroud, 
p. 97. Act of 1723, chap. 15.) 

In Louisiana it is gravely set forth, by express 
statute, that "/ree people oi color ought never to insult 
or strike wliite people, nor presume to conceive them- 
selves equal to the whites ; but, on the contrary, they 
ought to yield to them on every occasion^ and never speak 
or answer them but with respect, but, under penalty 
OF IMPRISONMENT, according to the nature of the 
offense." (1 Martin's Digest, 610-42.) 

"In some of the States, if a free man of color ia 



358 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

accused of crime, he is denied the benefit of those 
forms of trial which the Common Law has estabhshed 
for the protection of innocence. Thus, in South 
Carolina, it is thought quite unnecessary to give the 
Grand and Petit Jury the trouble of inquiring into 
the case : he can be hung without so much ceremony. 
But who is a colored man ? We answer, the fairest 
man in Carolina, if it can be proved that a drop of 
negro blood flowed in the veins of his mother." 
(Jaj-'s Inquir}^, p. 21-2.) Judge Jay adduces an 
instance. AVilliam Tann, an overseer on a planta- 
tion, shot a slave. He was supjyosed to be a icJnte, 
and the customary forms of trial before the Court 
OF Sessions were in preparation, (before whom, as 
being a white man, he would undoubtedly have been 
cleared.) But " on an issue ordered and tried for 
ascertaining his caste, it was decided that he was of 
jriXEU BLOOD." So he was " turned over by the 
Court to the jurisdiction of magistrates and free- 
holders, by whom he was sentenced to be hung. 
The particulars appeared in the Charleston Courier 
in 1835. 

" The Corporation of Georgetown, in the District 
of Columbia, passed an ordinance, making it penal 
for any free negro to receive from the Post-office, 
have in his possession, or circulate, any publication 
or writing of a seditious character." (Jay's Inquiry, 
p. 23.) 

" In North Carolina, the law prohibits a colored 
man, whatever may be his attainments or ecclesias- 
tical authority, to preach the gospel." (lb.) 



FUEE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 359 

" In Georgia, a white man is liable to a fine of 
five hundred dollars for teaching a FREE negro to 
read or write. If one free negro teach another, he 
is fined and whipped, at the discretion of the Court ! 
Should a free negro presume to preach to or exhort 
his companions, he may be seized without warrant, 
and whipped thirty-nine lashes, and the same num- 
ber of lashes may be applied to each one of his con- 
gregation, (lb.) 

" In some States, free negroes may not assemble 
in greater number than seven. In North Carolina, 
free negroes may not trade, buy, or sell, out of the 
cities wherein they reside, under penalty of forfeit- 
ing their goods, and receiving, in lieu thereof, thirty- 
nine lashes ! (lb.) 

" In Ohio, [a free State,] not only are the blacks 
excluded from the benefit of public schools, but, 
with a refinement of cruelty unparalleled, they are 
doomed to idleness and poverty by a law which ren- 
ders a ivliite man who employs a colored one to labor 
for him for one hour, liable for his support through 
life." (lb. 24.) 

The Ohio law is, we believe, repealed. But in 
New-York, and some other Northern cities, colored 
persons are still denied licenses to drive carts, and 
pursue other similar avocations for a livelihood. 

In Indiana, a free State, the testimony of free 
negroes and mulattoes is not received against a white 
man. (Child's Appeal, p. QQ.) 

" By a late law of Maryland, a free negro coming 
into the State is liable to a fine of fifty dollars for 



860 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

every weelc lie remains in it ! If he cannot pay the 
fine, he is sold !" (Jay's Inquiry, p. 24.) 

" Should a colored citizen of Maryland cross its 
boundar}^, on business never so urgent to himself and 
his family, on returning home, more than a month 
after, he is liable to be seized and SOLD, unless, pre- 
vious to his departure, he had complied with certain 
vexatious legal formalities, and which, from igno- 
rance, he would be extremely likely to neglect, or 
perform imperfecth'." (Jay's Inquiry, p. 90.) 

"A citizen of Kew-York, if he happens to be 
colored, may not visit a dying child in Maryland 
without incurring a penalty of fifty dollars for every 
week he remains ; and if he is unable to pay the fine, 
why, then he is to be sold by the sheriff at public sale, 
for such a time as may be necessary to cover the 
aforesaid penalty. But if a free negro is sold for a 
limited time, he is in reality sold for life. During 
the term for which he is sold, he is sold as a chattel^ 
and may be transported at the pleasure of his master ; 
and when the expiration of his term finds him in a 
cotton-field in Missouri, or a sugar-mill in Louisiana, 
who is to rescue him from interminable bondage ?" 
(Jay's Inquiry, p. 90.) 

It is known that such cases have occurred, and 
that free negroes taken up as fugitives in the Federal 
District have been sold to the slavetraders and sent 
to the far South. A case is narrated in a petition to 
Congress, signed by Judge Cranch and nearly eleven 
hundred citizens of the Federal District in 1828. And 
the advertisements of free negroes for sale by the 



FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 861 

marshal and sheriff, appear frequently in the public 
journals. Mr, Miner, in the U. S. House of Kepre- 
sentatives, in 1829, stated that in 1826-7 no less than 
five persons in the Federal District were thus sold 
into perpetual bondage for jail fees ! (Jay's Inquiry, 
p. 155.) 

"A free colored man living near the line of the 
District of Columbia, petitioned the House of Dele- 
gates of Maryland for leave to bring his grandchild 
fi-oni the city of Washington. The child had proba- 
bly been left an orphan, and he naturally wished to 
take it to his own house. The petition was rejected." 
(Jay's Inquiry, p. 90.) 

" In North Carolina, free negroes are whipped, 
fined, and imprisoned, at the discretion of the Court, 
for intermarrying with slaves." (Child's Appeal, 
p. 70.) 

In Georgia, "Any person of color, bond or />ee, 
is forbidden to occupy any tenement except a kitchen 
or outhouse, under penalty of from twenty to iifty 
lashes. Some of these laws are applicable only to 
particular cities, towns, or counties ; others to several 
counties." (lb.) 

"Emancipated slaves must quit North Carolina in 
ninety days after their enfranchisement, on pain of 
being sold for life. Free persons who shall ' migrate 
into ' the State may be seized and sold as runaway 
slaves; and if they '■migrate out'' of the State for 
more than ninety days, they can never return, under 
the same penalty." "A visit to relatives in another 
State may be called ' migrating ;' being taken up and 
16 



362 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

detained by kidnappers over ninety days may he 
called ' mujrating.'' " (lb., p. 68.) 

In all tlie seaport cities and towns of the slave 
States tliere are regulations forbidding masters of 
merchant-vessels to land any free colored person. 
And if any seaman, cook, or steward in such vessel 
be colored^ he is immediately seized, (though a citizen 
of one of the free States,) and kept in jail at the 
expense of the shij), until she is ready to sail. This 
is a great grievance, not only to such colored sea- 
men, but to the ship masters and ship owners. It is 
also a direct and palpable violation of the Constitu- 
tion of the United States. 

The Legislature of South Carolina, in Dec. 1822, 
by express statute, ordained the enforcement of this 
usage, by providing that, in case the ship master 
should refuse paying the expense of the seaman's 
imprisonment, he may be " indicted and fined not 
less than one thousand dollars, and imprisoned not 
less than two months, and such free negroes shall be 
sold as slaves. The Circuit Court of the United 
States adjudged the law unconstitutional, and void. 
Yet nearly two years after this decision, four colored 
seamen were taken out of the English brio^ Marmion. 
England made a formal complaint to our Govern- 
ment. Mr. Wirt, the Attorney-general, gave the 
opinion that the law was unconstitutional. This, as 
well as the above-mentioned decision, excited strong 
indignation in South Carolina. Notwithstanding the 
decision, the law still remains in force." (Child's 
Appeal, p. 63.) 



FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 863 

"North Carolina has made a la\y, subjecting any 
vessel with free colored persons on board to thirty 
days' quarantine, as if freedom were as bad as tlic 
cholera ! Any person of color coming on shore from 
such vessels is seized and imprisoned till the vessel 
departs, and the captain is fined five hundred dol- 
lars ; and if he refuse to take the colored seaman 
away, and pay the expenses of his imprisonment, he 
is fined five hundred more. If the sailor do not 
depart within ten days after the captain's refusal, he 
must be whipped thirty-nine lashes ; and all colored 
persons, bond or /ree, who communicate with him, 
receive the same." (lb., p. 69.) 

"In Georgia there is a similar enactment. The 
prohibition is, in both States, confined to merchant- 
vessels ; (it would be imprudent to meddle with ves- 
sels-of-ivar ;) and any person communicating with 
such seaman is whipped not exceeding ildrtu lashes. 
If the captain refuse to carry away seamen thus de- 
tained, and pay the expenses of their imprisonment, 
he is fined five hundred dollars, and also imprisoned 
not exceeding three months." (lb.) 

The State of Massachusetts sent an agent to South 
Carohna, and another to Louisiana, to see what ad- 
justment could be made of the difficulties growing- 
out of these enactments. But they were both 
promptly ejected from those States, laden with in- 
sults, and gladly hastened their escape, to save their 
lives ! 

A most comprehensive class of oppressive enact- 
ments against the free people of color, are those 



S6-i THE AMERia^JN^ SLAVE CODE. 

designed and operating, directly or indirectly, to 
DRIVE TnE:^[ OUT OF THE couxTRY ! Some of tlie 
enactments mentioned already, i^articularly those of 
Maryland, are kno-\vn to have had this end in view, 
and to have been instigated by the leading influences 
seeking their expulsion to Africa ! 

A favorite scheme of the Virginia slaveholders, 
at an early day, was to enhst Congress in the enter- 
prise of colonizing the free blacks in Africa, for the 
better security of the slave system at home. Soon 
after the alarms of a suspected or attempted insur- 
rection of slaves, the proposition was formally 
brought forward. It proved a failure ; whereuiDon 
the leaders of the movement, members of Congress 
and others, organized the American Colonization 
Society, which has its auxiliaries in most of the 
States, North and South. At the North, it has been 
advocated as an ally of emancipation ; at the South, 
as the gTand conservator of the slave system; in 
both sections, it has infused the sentiment that there 
must or can be no emanciiDations, unless connected 
with transportation to Africa ; that it is impossible 
for the colored race to enjoy the rights of freemen 
in this country ; and that the whites and blacks can- 
not live together in peace, in the enjoyment of equal 
rights ! Into the history or the merits of this So- 
ciety we cannot here enter, any further than is 
necessary in order to understand the State legisla- 
tion, Southern and Northern, designed to harass and 
oppress the free blacks, and drive them out of the 
country. The constitution of the Society restricts 



FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 3G5 

it to the colonization of free colored people, with 
tlieir own free consent. But it is a well-established 
fact, that many of its leading members have con- 
templated, whenever practicable, the employment of 
force. The reader is referred to Jay's "Inquiry" 
for abundant evidence of this. And the same class 
of persons have been busily engaged in promoting 
legislation against the free people of color, both in 
the slave and the free States. On many occasions, 
the auxiliary Colonization Societies, their agents 
and their public speakers, have explicitly justified 
and sanctioned those oppressive enactments. And 
the official organ of the Parent Society (the African 
Repository) has given systematic circulation to those 
injurious and slanderous aspersions of this much- 
injured class, upon which the legislative persecution 
of them has been based. (See Jay's Inquiry, p. 18, 
&c.) In the preceding chapter, we have quoted an 
instance of direct approbation of those laws by an 
auxiliary Society, and will here add one more. The 
New- York State Colonization Society, in a memorial 
to the State Legislature, said : " We do not ask that 
the provisions of our Constitution and Statute Book 
should be so modified as to relieve and exalt 
the condition of the colored people whilst they re- 
main icith us. Let these provisions stand, ix all 
THEIR RIGOR, to work out the ultimate and un- 
bounded good of this people!" That is, by com- 
pelling them to be colonized, or remain oppressed 
and degraded ! 

In Connecticut, in 1833, the leading colonization- 



B66 THE AMESIC-IN SLAVE CODE. 

ists procured a legislative enactment against schools 
for colored puj^ils, avowedly for tlie purpose of 
breaking wp the school of Miss Prudence Crandall, 
at Canterbury. Under that enactment she was prose- 
cuted, and being unable to procure bail, was com- 
mitted to prison, but was bailed out the next day. 
At her trial, before Judge Daggett, a verdict was 
given against her. " The cause was removed to the 
Court of Errors, where all the proceedings were set 
aside on technical grounds." Miss Crandall's school 
was afterwards broken up by a mob ; and the gen- 
tleman who had been most active in procuring the 
passage of the "back act" agamst the education of 
free negroes (Mr. A. T. Judson) was appointed agent 
and orator of the Windham County Colonization 
Society. We record the facts, in evidence that en- 
actments against the free people of color are not a 
dead letter, but are procured and sustained by the 
leading influences in the Church and the State, at 
the North and the South. 

In Philadelphia, in New- York city, and in other 
places, meetings of the Colonization Society, in which 
Doctors of Divinity, statesmen, and jurists have 
declaimed vehemently against the free people of 
color, denied their right to a home in the land of 
their birth, and justified the oppressive statutes 
against them, have been immediately followed by 
frightful riots against the proscribed class, in which 
their dwellings have been demolished, their churches 
broken open and injured, their persons assaulted, 
and numbers of them, in one instance, lolled ! And 



FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 867 

no legal protection nor redress has been extended to 
them ! These scenes have been uniformly followed 
by special efforts to induce them to be colonized 
in Liberia "with their own free consent" ! ! ! 

The Virginia and Maryland auxiliaries to the 
American Colonization Society have sought and ob- 
tained appropriations from the Legislatures of those 
States, under circumstances that virtually involved 
compulsion. The original bill (in the Virginia 
Legislature) making the appropriation "contained 
a clause for the compulsory transportation of free 
blacks." (Jay's Inq., p. 50.) On a motion to strike ■ 
out the compulsory clause, Mr. Brodnox opposed it, 
saying: " It is idle to talk of not resorting to 
FORCE. Every hody 'must look io the employment of 
force of some land or other ! If the free negroes are 
willing to go, they will go. If not willing, they must 
he oompelled to go. Some gentlemen think it politic 
not now to insert this feature in the bill, though 

THEY PROCLAIM THEIR READINESS TO RESORT TO IT 

"WHEN NECESSARY ; they think that for a year or two 
a sufficient number will consent to go, and then the 
REST CAN BE COMPELLED. For my part, I deem it 
better to approach the question at once, and settle it 
openly. The intelligent portion of the free negroes 
knoAV very well what is going on. Will they not 
see that coercion is ultimately to be resorted to ? I 
have already expressed my opinion that few, very 
few, will voluntarily consent to emigrate if no com- 
pulsory measures be adopted. Without it, you will 
still, no doubt, have applicants for removal, equal to 



368 TBTE AilERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

your means. Yes, Sir. People will not only coment, 
but beg you to deport them ! But ivhai sort of con- 
sent ? A consent extorted by a species of oppression 
calculated to render their situation among us insup- 
portable ! Many of those who have been abeady 
sent off went with their avowed consent, but under 
the influence of a more decided compulsion than any 
which this bill holds out. I will not express in its 
fullest extent the idea I entertain of what has been 
done, or what enormities will be perpetrated to induce 
this class of persons to leave the State." 

Mr. B. jDroceeded to describe, at length, the pro- 
cess of obtaining " consent" by a series of " flagel- 
lations," and then said : 

" I have certainly heard (if incorrectly, the gen- 
tleman from Southampton will put me right) that all 
the large cargo of emigrants lately transported from 
that country to Liberia, all of whom professed to be 
willing to go, were rendered so by some such minis- 
tration as I have described." (Jay's Inq., pp. 50-1.) 

Mr. Fisher expressed similar sentiments. The 
compulsory clause was, however, stricken out. The 
result justified the prediction of Messrs. Brodnax 
and Fisher. 

"I warned the managers against this Virginia 
business," (said Rev. R. J. Brcckcuridge,) "andz/^ 
they sent out two ship-loads of vagabonds, not fit to 
go to such a place, and that were coerced away as 
truly as if it had been done by a cart-whip." (Speech 
before the Society. Jaj-'s Inq., p. 51-2.) Dr. Brecken- 
ridge, it is believed, has since declared himself openly 



FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 869 

in favor of compulsory colonization, with a view, 
perhaps, of avoiding the worse "enormities" de- 
scribed by Mr. Brodnax. 

The " Maryland Colonization Society" having, at 
length, (in 1841,) openly defined its position, we let 
it speak for itself, in its own language. We have 
the account from a Baltimore paper. The meeting 
was held in the Light Street Methodist Episcopal 
Church, Bishop A¥augh in the chair, and the meet- 
ing opened with prayer ! The declaration is as fol- 
lows : 

" That while it is most earnestly hoped that the 
free colored people of Maryland may see that their 
best and most permanent interests will be consulted 
by their emigration from this State ; and while this 
Convention would deprecate any departure from the 
principle which makes colonization dependent upon 
the voluntary action of the free colored j)eoplc them- 
selves ; yet if, regardless of what has been done to 
provide them with an asylum, they continue to per- 
sist in remaining in Maryland, in the hope of enjoy- 
ing here an equality of social and political rights, 
they ought to be solemnly WAENED that, in the 
opinion of this Convention, a day must arrive when 
circumstances that cannot he controlled^ and which are 
now maturing, WILL DEPEIVE THEM OF THE 
FREEDOM OF CHOICE, and leave them no alter- 
native but removal." 

And this is what is meant by colonizing the free 
people of color with their own consent ! The Mary- 
land Colonization Society, with a Bishop presiding, 
16^ 



370 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE, 

and vnth its meeting opened by prayer, have openly 
taken a position that the Legislature of Virginia, 
from a remaining sense of decency, could not be 
persuaded to avow ! 

A Florida slaveholder wrote "A Treatise on the 
Patriarchal System of Slavery," in which he says : 
"Colonization in Africa has been proi^osed to the 
free colored people, io fonuard which, a general sys- 
tem of persecution against them, upheld from the 
pulpit, has been legalized throughout the Southern 
States." (Jay's Inq., p. 49.) That " Florida slave- 
holder" (if we mistake not the person) has good 
cause to feel the injustice he describes. His only 
heirs are "free people of color," his own children, 
for whom he has obtained an education among the 
abolitionists of the North ! We see in this, one of 
the many ways in which the wrongs of the colored 
race are visited upon their Avhite oppressors. 

The constitutions and statutes of free States de- 
barring their free colored citizens from eligibility to 
office, and from equal access to the ballot-box, are 
among the most marked and mischievous specimens 
of injury to the colored race. It is this that sus- 
tains the slave States in their oppression of both the 
bond and the free. And of this iniquitous legisla- 
tion at the North, the negro pew and the correspond- 
ing treatment of negroes in seminaries of learning 
controlled by the Church are the principal supports. 
A Legislative Committee, in the State of New- York, 
alleged if/iw as the reason why the policy of the State 
could not be changed. Social customs, placing 



FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR. 371 

colored people out of the pale of refined society, 
come under the same censure. How much better, 
on the whole, are the people than their laws, 
whether at the North or at the South ? 

The picture presented in this chapter contrasts 
strikingly with the condition of the free people of 
color in the British West Indies before emancipation, 
and at the time it took place. That event, if we are 
rightly informed, found the free colored people in 
the enjoyment of civil and political rights, some of 
them editors of pubUc journals, and holders of mu- 
nicipal office. 

But such a condition of things, it may be said, 
could not consist with the perpetuity of West Indian 
slavery, and may account for its termination. Be it 
so. Our slaveholders undoubtedly think so. The 
whole system of persecuting and of attempting to 
drive away the free people of color to Africa, has 
its origin in this apprehension. The main object is 
the perpetuity of slavery. The fugitive slave biU is 
chiefly designed and relied upon to frighten the free 
colored jpeople of the free Slates out of the country! This 
is its chief poioer ! 

The "innocent legal relation of slave ownership" 
comes in again here, as the responsible parent of all 
the oppressive enactments recorded in this chapter. 



CHAPTER IL 

LIBERTIES OF THE WHITE PEOPLE OF THE SLAVE- 
HOLDIXG STATES. 

The White People of the Slaveholding States, whether Slaveholders or Non- 
slaveholders, are deprived, by the Slave Code, of some of their essential rights, 
and cannot be regarded as a people in possession of civil, religious, and 
political Freedom. 

The "usages of liuman cliattelliood cannot be tol- 
erated in any communitj Avitliout impairing the 
freedom and invading tlie riglits of every member of 
that communit}^, wlietlier slaveliolder or non-slave- 
liolder. The fact of tolerated human chattelhood is 
the fact of constantly violated natural laiL\ which lies 
at the basis of all law, the guardian of every man's 
rights. In the very act of claiming a slave, a man 
denies all rights of property, by denj-ing the inherent 
right of self-ownership in all men, upon which right 
all other rights are based. All rights of lyersonal 
security are denied by the same claim. Wherever 
"the innocent legal relation" of slave ownership is 
witnessed and is tolerated, there is witnessed the 
public and deliberate denial of all that which forms 
the basis of liuman laws, and ujDon which all legis- 



. LIBERTY AT THE SOUTH. 373 

lative enactments for tlie protection of Imman rights 
must repose. 

One necessary consequence must be, that in adjust- 
ing the legislation and the jurisprudence of a country 
to the public recognition of human chattelhood, the 
adjustment must inevitably trench upon the rights 
of all other men, as well as upon the rights of the 
enslaved. This may seem to some a mere abstract 
speculation, but a few familiar instances will make 
the case clear. 

"We will take, in the first place, the case of the 
slaveholder himself. Assuredly, it will be said, the 
slaveholder is sufficiently free ! Let us examine. 
To be a despot is a very different thing from being 
free. 

Here is a slaveholder who, as a thrifty manager 
of his own property, wishes to make the best and 
most economical use of his slave property, according 
to his own best discretion. Can he do so ? Here 
is Tom, a shrewd, intelligent, trustworthy fellow, 
whom he would gladly make " overseer " of his plan- 
tation, as is indeed sometimes done. He wishes to 
send Tom to market frequently with his produce, 
and to bu.y goods. It would be very convenient to 
have Tom read, write, and "cipher," which "the 
law " will not allow ! And here comes the neio law, 
requiring each planter to keep " at least one " white 
man on the plantation, (under pretense that a white 
loitness must be there.) This one white man must, 
of course, do something to pay his way. What can it 
be but to act as overseer, in which double capacity, 



874 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

if need be, he can bear witness against himself or his 
emjDloyer ! So Tom^ in whom his master reposes more 
confidence, must sink back into the station of a mere 
field hand. 

Here is a waiting-maid, discreet and pious; or 
here is a nurse, whom all her owner's children call 
" Mammy." A little knowledge of letters would 
qualify one or both of them to teach the little white 
masters and misses their alphabet. Is it too much 
to suppose that there is, in all the slaveholding 
South, one "good Christian slaveholder " (so called) 
who has good sense and humanity enough to desire 
such an arrangement? [If there is no% let "the in- 
nocent legal relation " be called to account for it.] 
If there he such an one, where is the legal protection 
of his right to select a teacher of the alphabet to his 
own children? In Louisiana, he would be subject 
to one year's imprisonment for teaching such a slave 
to read! He enjoys liberty^ does he? 

But here is a master whose aspirations for freedom 
are less sublimated. He only wishes to make money 
by slaveholding. And the best way, he thinks — es- 
pecially as he has not the land for them to cultivate, 
or does not choose the vexation of attending to that 
business — ^is to let them "hire out" in the neighbor- 
ing borough, where their labor, at various jobs, is 
much wanted by the loliite citizens. A "peculium" 
of their earnings would greatly stimulate their exer- 
tions. But the Slave Code forbids it ! And it forbids 
the white citizens of the borough, including slave 
owners, to employ them. This is liberty for white 



LIBERTY AT THE SOUTH. 875 

people! Forbidden to hire tlieir work done for 
them ! They will be likely, in such an exigency, to 
discover that there is "a hiylier law" than the Slave 
Code ! 

Look next at the enactments forbidding emanci- 
pation on the soil, or obstructing or forbidding it 
altogether. Those slaveholding Quakers in North 
Carolina that emancipated 134 slaves in 1776, only 
to see them reenslaved! — where were their rights? 
They forfeited them, perhaps, by turning aboH- 
tionists. 

Look then at the dying Thomas Jefferson, the 
penman of the declaration that "all men are created 
equal," now penning a clause of his last will and 
testament, conferring freedom (as common report 
says) on his own enslaved offspring, so far as the 
Slave Code permitted him to do it, supplying the 
lack of power by '■'■ humhly'''' imploring the Legisla- 
ture of Virginia to confirm the bequests, "with per- 
mission to remain in the State, where their families 
and connections are" — then dying, under the uncer- 
tainty whether his requests would be granted or his 
children sold into the rice swamps! One of his 
daughters, it seems, icas afterwards sold at auction 
in New-Orleans, at the harem price ! And his 
granddaughter was colonized to Liberia — "coerced" 
perhaps by the "cart- whip!" A land of liberty for 
white people — for slaveholders, is it — where a 
Jefferson cannot bequeath liberty to his own children! 
In Georgia, had he lived and died there, the "a^ 
temjJt" would have been an ^^ offense," for which his 



376 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

estate would have been subjected to a fine of a thou- 
sand dollars, and each of his executors, if accepting 
the trust, a thousand more ! 

The " Florida slaveholder" before mentioned, with 
his princely fortune, his educated and accomplished 
heirs, the children of his parental affection, HIS 
OXLY ones, but — under the "persecuting" ban of 
the " Colonization Society," " the jjulpit," (Northern 
and Southern,) and the "legislation" approved by 
them — outcasts, unable to testify in a Court, against 
a white man ; liable to be colonized to Liberia under 
force of "flagellations" and untold "enormities;" or 
even to be kidnapped and enslaved ! — the Florida 
slaveholder, we say, with such a famil}" around his 
board, presents another specimen of the liberty and 
human right senjoyed by the slaveholder! By no 
means so rare a case as the Northern reader would, 
perhaps, imagine. 

Nor is it on the plantation alone that such cases 
occur. We remember a thrifty mechanic in a 
Southern city, who acquired a comfortable estate, and 
lived more elegantly than mechanics in Southern 
cities commonly do. lie owned several slaves. 
But his family was of the mixed race. He lived 
with a quadroon woman, without marriage, of course, 
for the laws would not permit it. Ilis daughters 
were elegant, beautiful, and nearly white. They 
were free, as was also their mother ; but they were 
subject to the vexations that harass "/ree people of 
color." The father sought for them respectable con- 
nections in life, and nothing but the laws forbidding 



LIBERTY AT THE SOUTH. 377 

such marriages stood in the Avay; for they were 
much admired, members of the Methodist Episcopal 
Church, and one of them was loved and wooed by a 
tvkite member of the same church, and a slaveholder ; 
but the law stood in the way of their marriage ! She 
might have become his mistress without fear of the 
law, and almost, perhaps, without scandal. Whether 
she afterwards did so, we cannot tell. We call atten- 
tion to the legal rights, not of slaves, but of slave- 
holders, to the holy institution of marriage, and to 
the sanctities of the family relation. 

Having broached the "delicate subject," we will 
venture one other illustration. A young man, a 
son of a slaveholder, a graduate of one of our North- 
ern colleges, became enamored, on his return home, 
of a beautiful girl, nearly white, who was the property 
of his father. She had been piously educated, and 
had become a member of a church. The young 
man, too, had made a profession of religion at the 
North. They had played together in childhood, and 
were affectionately attached to each other. An illicit 
or secret connection was not to be contemplated. 
But she was a slave ; and whether bond or free, 
she could not legally be married to a white man ! 
What could be done? If they eloped Avithout her 
owner's consent, the slave-catchers and their blood- 
hounds might be after them. If his consent and her 
free papers could be obtained, where should they go? 
Not to the " free North," for the exquisite curl of her 
hair, so lovely in Ms eyes, would attract the attention 
and the obloquy of the childi'cn of the Puritans. 



378 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

The sequel we cannot tell, furtlier than that the 
young man took an exploring voyage to the West 
Indies, and was said to have returned. Whether 
they emigrated and Avere married, or whether, re- 
maining in this "free Christian country," they fell 
into the current of prevailing usages around them, 
we cannot tell. The imagination of a Mrs. Harriet 
Beecher Stowe may fill up the picture — a subject 
worthy of her pencil. 

Are we dealing in romance ? Come, then, and we 
will introduce you to a Vice-President of the United 
States — a very singular man, to be sure, though not 
singular in being a slaveholder, nor singular in hav- 
ing beautiful colored daughters, to be sought after 
(in some sort) by white gentlemen; but singular in 
giving his colored daughters a good education, at- 
tending them in public as a father, and insisting that 
whoever admired and sought them should do so 
only in the way of honorable marriage ! The sin- 
gularity of Colonel Eichard M. Johnson attracted 
the nation's attention. He was so very singular as to 
treat the mother of his colored daughters as though 
she were his wife, to give her the charge of his 
household, a seat by his side at his table, addressing 
her as "Mrs. Johnson" — to do aU this, instead of 
selling her in the market, as some other great states- 
men have sold the mothers of their colored children. 
When " Mrs. Johnson" became religious and wished 
to unite with the church, the good minister felt it 
his duty to tell her that there was an obstacle in 
the way — the scandal of her living as she did with 



LIBERTY AT THE SOUTH. 879 

Colonel Johnson. She immediately communicated 
the fact to the Colonel. " You know, my dear," said 
he, "I have always been ready to marry you, when- 
ever it could be done. I am ready now, and will 
call on your minister about it." He did so, and re- 
quested the minister to marry them, after explaining 
the facts of the case. The good minister was now 
in a worse dilemma than before! What! marry 
Colonel Johnson to a colored woman ! What could 
he say ? He could only say that the law would not 
permit such a marriage. "Very well," retorted Colo- 
nel Johnson, (who was not a Christian,) "if your 
Christian law of marriage will not permit me to 
marry the woman of my choice, nor permit her to 
marry the man of her choice, it must even permit 
us to live together ivithout marriage." So saying, he 
walked away, and that was the last that was said 
about the marriage. Whether the lady was received 
into the church, we cannot tell. 

Before the outbreak of the anti-abohtion excite- 
ment, and the consequent clamor about amalgation, 
an agent of the New- York State Temperance Society 
(Rev. Mr. Yale) was sent to New Orleans to promote 
the cause of temperance. He wrote from thence a 
letter, published in an Albany rehgious paper, con- 
taining a graphic picture of the state of morals and 
of society in that city. The cause of temperance 
could make little progress there without a reforma- 
tion in other respects: the U23rooting of habits of 
licentiousness, the restoration of the family institu- 
tion ; but this can never be, he continued, until the 



380 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

laws are repealed wliicli forbid the intermarriage of 
the white and colored races. A large portion of the 
people are of the mixeci blood. The women of this 
class are accounted elegant and beautiful. Many of 
the first gentlemen of Xew-Orleans will live with 
them, whether with or without marriage; the conse- 
sequence of which is a general depravity of morals. 

It is needless to say that the picture is truthful, 
and that its truthfulness is not confined to New- 
Orleans. One iron link in the chain of the slave is 
the denial to him of the rights of the family relation, 
and of freedom of choice in marriage. But this 
badge of slavery we have found upon the neck of 
the slaveholder. In denying free marriage to his 
colored brother, the white man has denied the same 
right to himself! 

We cannot dismiss this branch of the subject 
without a further remark. When we contemplate 
the vast and rapidly increasing extent of inter- 
mixture between the races ; when we remember 
that "the noblest blood of Virginia" and of all the 
slave States "runs in the veins of slaves," and is still 
more widely diffused among the so-called "free 
people of color ;" and when we remember the legalized 
persecutions, inflictions, and liabilities to which even 
this latter class are found subject — ^hunted back into 
slavery, or driven as exiles from the country of their 
birth — we are shut up to one of two conclusions : 
Eitlior the Southern slaveholders must be almost 
miiversaJhj the most heartless, barbarous, and brutal 
people on the face of the earth, or else there must 



LIBERTY AT THE SOUTH, 381 

be tliousands of slaveliolders whose hearts are wrung 
daily with anguish, at the thought of the murderous 
injustice done by the slave laws to their relations and 
kindred — to their children, to their sisters, to their 
brothers, to their nephews, to their nieces, to their 
cousins — for of such are a large portion of the slaves 
and free colored people composed ! 

We take the most charitable supposition, and con- 
clude that the same cruel laws that wear out the 
lives of the proscribed race, are oppressive likewise 
to a large class of slaveholders, who see their near 
kindred crushed and murdered continually by them. 

If this is not so^ then the pretense of "humane 
and Christian slaveholders " is all a delusion ! If it 
is not so, then the slave system has extinguished 
human nature and religion at the South. 

If slaveholders are not themselves oppressed by the 
Slave Code, it can only be because they have become 
monsters who have no sensibilities to be lacerated, 
no hearts capable of compassion, no unseared con- 
sciences to be outraged. We should be sorry to 
think thus of the majority of them. 

The same may be said of the operation of those 
laws and usages of slavery that forbid tlie education, 
religious instruction, and free social worship of the 
slaves and so-called free people of color. The pious 
ichite people of the South, the ministers of religion, 
churches, and church members, are either aggrieved 
and oppressed by these enactments and usages, or 
else they are not. On the latter supposition, we are 
presented with a Church and ministry disregardful of 



332 THE ameeicax slave code. 

their liigli mission, and Trell-nigh apostate. On the 
former, we see a Chnrcli and ministry imder the ban 
of persecution, and crippled in their operations bj 
the strong arm of despotic power. 

Under laws bj which colored Methodists, Baptists, 
and Presbjterians are forbidden the free exercise of 
religion and religions worship, we are warranted in 
assnming that white Methodists, Baptists, and Pres- 
byterians feel themselves insulted and aggrieved; 
that when thej see them dragged from the house of 
prayer (or on their return home) to the watch-house, 
or writhing under the lash awarded by law for the 
oSense, t}iey sympathize icith thern, under their •persecu- 
tions, and feel, themselves, in the persons of their 
brethren and sisters, under the same ban. 0/- ehe^ 
if it be not so, we are compelled to regard them as 
virtually consenting to the persecution of their 
brethreiL We should be sorry to think thus of atx 
the v:hite Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyterians of 
the South. And consequently we are compelled to 
consider the better portion of them under persecu- 
tion along with their colored brethren. 

If there be any thing that Christianity enjoins on 
her disciples — if there be any thing in which they 
are engaged — if there be any thing from which they 
cannot, without the strong arm of persecution, be 
driven ; it is the free assembling of themselves to- 
gether for social worship and consultation, for mutual 
instruction and united prayer; and especially the 
communication of religious knowledge to others, 
and promoting the circulation and reading of the 



3S 

■-ras 



ris<ee3iu€'d im!^3tt3saeSmess3£- o: 



r.-:!^zioiJ5 uAife people, ai tJse Soin^ are €:' 
— " -•e:sit»3iSTo:rs. or e]i3e laey see nader ~ trse- 

~ : 1^ - - - S'XirTT irn rise mi^ossaxies amoa^ the 

T Messrs. Wiifkimaii aad Tur^sL, ^nae 

: rris?2:iiarr fieM in SewflOi C^boraliBa, 

TTl-: TT,:, :.„^., ^- liberties of t3i«?6e ndbife 

Cji-if-: -5 :- C-i:y-e53cci. <S. C>) ia ISlS. vl>o esaab- 

Sj/: : :.:i-=cbool for tlie instTBcikm c€ eoloied 

- — ':^ ^strbadden (under pioialrr of 

. tlse iaMkJion of "tinatttjr- 

rry in XcTT-OIeasis? 
7 -s Pkavime, Axig. Id. ISil : 

• C -::> incev B. Blake Tras bas>ii^t b?foj>e Eecoi>iCT 
^ ' " " ' : ■ slaTTcs. Ii 

- - . . --'.vr ^ta a 

nimiber of ^lem in the street ; tba« r. : ricaoa if 

tibey CDTild resid and irr' l» 

havf a ^?»k This was : . - ay 

aeainst him- In paRiaiian rf . ~ -ct. it iras 

sioTTTi ili3T lie "vnis 3 resr.ila" ' ^ 

Bible SodeiT i:^ Xew-Orlear:? > 

to STidi as -vrould aeeepi of it 7 ^ 



384 THE AMEBIC AN SLAVE CODE. 

disclaimed having the most distant intention of giving 
the /Scriptures to slaves, and it was said Blake had 
exceeded his commission in offering it. But as it 
appeared to be a misunderstanding on his part, and 
not intentional interference, he was discharged with 
a caution not to repeat his offense^ (Furnished by 
Judge Jay.) 

What is civil, religious, or political liberty; or 
where is the independence of the judiciary under 
enactments like the following ? 

Louisiana. — "If any person shall use any language 
from the bar, bench, stage, pulpit, or in any 
OTHER place, or hold any conversation having a 
TENDENCY to promote discontent among free colored 
people, or insubordination among slaves, he may be 
imprisoned at hard labor not less than three nor 
more than twentj'-one years ; or he may suffer death, 
at the discretion of the Court." (Child's Appeal, p. 
71. See also Kent's Commentaries, vol. II., part IV., 
p. 268, Note.) 

The lawyer cannot effectively plead the cause of a 
negro claiming his liberty; the judge, in charging 
the jury, or in giving his judicial decision, cannot 
repeat the common law maxims of Blackstone, 
Littleton, Coke, and Fortescue, appropriate to the 
case ; the actor of a drama cannot repeat the best 
passages in Shakspeare ; the minister of the gospel 
cannot use the language of Bishop Porteus, of John 
Wesley, of Jonathan Edwards ; nay, of St. James 
or Isaiah, without incui-ring the hazards of a con- 
demnation under this statute ! When one reads the 



LIBERTY AT THE SOUTH. S85 

labored "opinions" of Judge Euffin and otliers, in 
Wheeler's Law of Slavery, where the man is seen 
struggling with the judge, and a strong sense of the 
wrong of slavery betrays itself amid forced apologies 
and decisions in its favor, it is difficult to resist the 
impression that the intelligent judge is himself under 
the yoke of bondage to such statutes as the pre- 
ceding, or to the proscriptive temper that gave rise 
to them. The same may be said of such self-contra- 
dictory clergymen as Dr. Fuller and others, who, on 
the slave question, cannot conceal their Icnoidedge of 
anti-slavery truth, nor their /ea?- of giving it expres- 
sion. There is no freedom of speech nor of the 
press on this subject in the slave States. 

" In Mississippi, a white man who prints or cir- 
culates doctrines, sentiments, advice, or inuendoes, 
LIKELY to produce discontent among the colored 
class, is fined from one hundred to a thousand dol- 
lars, and imprisoned from three to twelve months." 
(Child's Appeal, p. 71.) 

" In North Carolina, ' for publishing or circulating 
any pamphlet or paper having an evident tendency 
to excite slaves or free persons of color to insurrec- 
tion or resistance,' the law provides imprisonment 
not less than one year, and standing in the pillory 
and whipping, at the discretion of the Court, for the 
first oflense, and death for the second." (lb., p. 67.) 

" In Georgia, the same without any reservation." 
(lb.) 

" In Virginia, the first offense is punished with 
thirty-nine lashes, and the second with death." (lb.) 
17 



386 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

Mr. Preston, Senator in Congress, declared, in his 
place in that body, that any person uttering abolition 
sentiments at the South would be hanged. 

What liberty, then, is there for icliite people at the 
South ? And who knows how much would be said 
there against slavery if the people dared to speak 
their thoughts ? Let us not rashly and too severely 
condemn the entire South. The white people there 
do not enjoy freedom. They share deeply in the 
bondasre of the blacks ! 

"Abolition editors, in slave States, will not dare 
avow their opinions." {Missouri Argus.) 

Perhaps the editor of the Argus dares not avow 
his. Perhaps he penned this very sentence to allay 
suspicions, and save his own life. 

A Southern member of Congress was not restrained 
by manly independence, or by any sense of shame 
for the lack of it, to avow his fears of punishment 
under such laws as have been quoted. An editor 
of a Northern paper, " The Friend of Man,^^ at 
Utica, ]Sr. Y., published Mr. Pinckney's Keport in 
the House of Representatives, on a subject involving 
the slave question, and to the Report he appended a 
review of its positions. lie sent some spare copies 
to members of Congress at Washington City, among 
whom was Hon. Adam Huntsman, of Tennessee, 
who soon after wrote a letter to the editor, request- 
ing him not to send him any such paper (opposed 
to slavery) after he should have returned to Tennessee, 
lest the bare reception and use of it should subject 
him to '"an infamous punishment — a penitentiary 



LIBERTY AT THE SOUTH. 387 

offense of five 3^ears' confinement!" The request 
was of course complied with, and tlie legislator re- 
mained unharmed. 

Where are the liberties of the citizens of the slave 
States, when forbidden to "trade, barter, or com- 
merce" with one third, one half, or two thirds of the 
inhabitants — forbidden to obey God by hiding the 
outcasts — forbidden to "entertain strangers," to 
"give food to the hungry" — forbidden to convey 
their persecuted neighbors to a home of security — 
forbidden to ease their tortures by striking oft" their 
pronged iron collars from their necks ? Who will 
slander the South by saying that none of its white 
citizens feel themselves injured, crushed, persecuted, 
and wronged by enactments like these ? Or can a 
people be said to enjoy liberty and security who live 
under such a code as this? 

There can be no libert}^ where there is no security, 
no protection, no law. And in the presence of such 
despotic power as that of the slaveholder, there can 
remain very little of these. A general spirit of law- 
lessness pervades the slave States. 

As to the non-slaveholding whites in the slave 
States, they are, as a class, and with few exceptions, 
in an abject and degraded condition. A large por- 
tion of them are uneducated and poor. In the 
presence of slave labor, and with the soil in the 
hands of slaveholders, there is little of lucrative 
labor within their reach. xVnd labor is there a badge 
of disgrace, assimilating them with the slaves. It is 
not strange that large numbers of them become im- 



388 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

provident and idle. Mechanics, including some from 
the North, constitute, to a considerable extent, an 
exception to these remarks. Even these are looked 
down upon by the slaveholding planters, who have 
contrived to monopolize and wield nearly all the 
political power. 

On the whole, it cannot with propriety be said 
that civil, religious, and political liberty exist in the 
slaveholding States. Nor can they exist there, so 
long as "the legal relation of owner and slave" re- 
mains. That relation blights and destroys all the 
natural and heaven-establisKed relations of life. 



CHAPTER III. 

LIBERTIES OF THE WHITE PEOPLE OF THE NON- 
SLAVEHOLDING STATES. 

The Rights of the White People of the Non-slaveholding States are directly 
and indirectly invaded by the Slave Code of the Slave States. Their Liberties, 
to a great extent, have already fallen a sacrifice, and can never be secure 
while Slaveholding continues. 

We open, here, upon a wider field than our limits 
will permit us to explore as its importance demands. 
The entire political histor}'- of the country, which 
might occupy volumes, demands attention under 
this head. But we must pass it by, only asking of 
the reader that he examine it at his leisure.* 

The topics of the last preceding chapter might, 
for the most part, be introduced here again. The 
white people of the North and of the South suffer, 
in common, many of the heavy inflictions of the 
slave master's lash. If the stroke fall less heavily 
upon the citizens of the free States, it nevertheless 
falls, and none the less really because, from stupidity 
induced by long-standing habit, a callous insensibility 

* Some sketches and outlines of tins history may bo found Ln 
the Author's " Slaverj- and Anti-Slavery, a History," <tc. 



890 THE -OrERTCAX SLAVE CODE. 

indicates that it is scarcely felt or perceived. In no 
other way did ever a jDcople, once free, submit to 
part with their freedom. " A people," says Montes- 
quieu, " may lose their hberties in a day, and not 
miss them for a century." Thus it Avas "svith the 
Eomans, who, under the reign of the tyrant jSTero, 
had not ceased boasting of their liberties ! 

So closely connected are the people of the free 
and of the slave States, that whatever affects the lat- 
ter can scarcely fail to affect the former. 

If the spectacle of human beings bereft of self- 
ownership and the rights of property is found to un- 
dermine the foundations of personal secuiity and the 
rights of property at the South, they cannot remain 
perfectl}- stable at the North. 

If brutal inflictions on the slaves beget brutal as- 
saults and encounters between Southern gentlemen, 
the contamination of the bad example cannot but 
have its effect at the I^orth. 

If slave labor at the South makes manual labor a 
badge of degradation tlicrc, such labor will become 
less respectable in the free States. 

If the whites of the South submit to the tyranny 
that forbids them to hold " commerce, trade, or bar- 
ter " with one half of their neighbors, the monev- 
making traffickers of the North will scarcely thiiilc 
of the indignity or the immense losses they suffer, 
in being shut out by the Slave Code from their 
natural and political right of conmierce with millions 
of their fellow-countrymen. 

If the jDcoplc of the South become debased and 



LIBERTY AT THE NORTH. 891 

servile, by submitting to the loss of freedom, of 
speech and of the press, those inestimable rights 
will become less prized at the North, and the natural 
attempts of slaveholders to extend this feature of 
their sway over the North will not lack for auxili- 
aries among editors, politicians, statesmen, lawyers, 
judges, and ministers of religion, in close affinity 
with those slaveholders at the North. 

If the whites of the South submit to enactments 
which forbid them to relieve the suifering, to feed 
the hungry, to shelter the outcasts, to perform the 
common offices of humanity to those most in need 
of them, the same ignoble and unmanly servility 
will be likely to manifest itself at the North, until 
the despots of the South become emboldened to 
enact statutes for extending tliis feature of their sway 
over the entire country. 

K churches, church members and ministers of re- 
ligion at the South (either as persecutors or as per- 
secuted) submit to arrangements by which the rights 
of free social worship, religious instruction, and mis- 
sionary labor (including the distribution of Bibles 
and the teaching of the people to read) are forbidden 
and suppressed, the churches, church members and 
ministers of the North connected with them, will be 
exposed to similar indignities, temptations, and dere- 
lictions. And b}' this process it may come to pass 
that, while compassing sea and land to convert the 
heathen abroad, and give to every family on the 
earth a Bible, and teach them to read it in Sabbath- 
schools, admonishing their missionaries not to heed 



392 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

the prohibitory decrees of civil governments, they 
may, nevertheless, be among the first to cry out 
a-gainst the application of their own doctrine to the 
heathen of America, made such by the slave codes 
of the South. 

And, finally, if the non-slaveholding whites of the 
South submit to be shorn of their political power, 
and despoiled of their civil liberties and political 
rights, the non-slaveholding whites of the North, 
equally contemned by the same oligarchy of slave- 
holders, will be likely to imbibe the same spirit of 
pusillanimous submission, to sink into the same 
degradation, and share the same fate. 

The intelligent reader need not be told that such, 
indeed, are the facts of the case, as already developed 
and incorporated into the history of the country. 
We need not and cannot enter here into the details; 
nor is it necessary to cite authorities in proof. Who- 
ever has been on the stage of action in this country, 
and a reader of the public journals for the last 
twenty years, will be at no loss for the particulars 
to which we refer. 

What has been now witnessed was matter of in- 
telligent anticipation and prediction before it took 
place. Though the climax of disgrace and ruin has 
not yet been reached, and may yet be averted by 
prompt efforts, yet we have come sufficiently near 
the i^recipice to recognize the truthfulness of the 
picture drawn, long since, of the gulf below, by one 
of our most eminent statesmen. In the House of 
Delegates of Maryland, in 1789, William Pixck- 



LIBERTY AT THE NORTH. 393 

ISTEY (a member of tlic Convention that had just 
drafted the Federal Constitution) held the following 
remarkable language : 

"I have no hope that the stream of general liberty 
will flow for ever impolluted through the mire of 
partial bondage^ or that those who have been habitu- 
ated to lord it over others will not, in time, become 
base enough to let others lord it over them. If they 
resist, it will be the struggle of pride and selfishness, 
not of principle.'' 

If the relation of slave o^vner and slave is to be 
continued, all this may be expected to follow, as the 
natural if not necessary result. By reverting again 
to the facts presented in the latter part of our chap- 
ter on the " origin of the relation and its subjects," 
it will be seen that the process of enslaving ivhite 
people has already commenced, and is making steady 
and rapid progress, with the prospect (according to 
Henry Clay) of becoming prevalent a few genera- 
tions hence, when the slavery and the existence of 
the black race shall have ceased. 



CONCLUDING CHAPTER. 

Summary Review of tlie Slave Code — Its Character and Effects — Inquiries 
concerning the Duties of Christians, Churches, and Ministers— the Responsi- 
bilities of Citizens, of Society, of Civil Governmeni, of Legislators and 
Magistrates — Scrutiny of the Legality of American Slavery— The Heaven- 
prescribed Remedy — The Worthlessness of Temporizing Substitutes — Closing 
Appeal. 

If the reader lias attentively considered the pre- 
ceding pages, he Avill now be able to pass an intelli- 
gent judgment upon the character of the Slave Code, 
and of the practice of slaveJioIding, protected and 
defined h}/ it. The so-called ^^ legal relation of master 
and slave^^ he will have found to be the relation of 
an owner to a human chattel, body and soul. The 
verity and the efficacy of this monstrous claim he 
will have traced in each successive chapter and topic 
of the entire treatise. He will have witnessed the 
legitimate workings of this claim in the connected 
incidents of slave traffic, seizure of slave property 
for debt, inheritance and division of slave property, 
and uses of slave property. He will have seen that 
in the presence of this claim slaves can possess 
nothing, can make no contract, can neither enter 
into the marriage relation, nor discharge the duties, 
nor claim the rights, nor share the sanctities of the 



CONCLUDING CHAPTER. 395 

family relation. He will have observed how this 
claim of absolute proprietorship in the slave involves 
the claim and virtually secures the exercise of un- 
limited and irresponsible authority on the part of 
the " owner ;" the enforcement of his labor without 
wages ; the direction of his food, clothing, and shel- 
ter; the infliction of discretionary punishment upon 
him, virtually amounting (in consequence of the in- 
competency of colored witnesses) to the power of 
life and death over him. This despotic power of the 
" owners " he will have seen delegated to overseers 
or agents, and shared by the members of their fami- 
lies. The same relation of slave ownership he will 
have seen substituting the legal protection of slave 
property for the p)^'^sonal protection of the slaves, 
leaving them exposed to the most frightful barbari- 
ties, without the right of self-protection, or the means 
of redress by a suit against the "owner;" without 
power of self-redemption, or even a change of mas- 
ters. This "relation," hereditary and perpetual, he 
has found to include the most crushing spiritual 
despotism over the rights of conscience ever claimed 
by man on the face of the earth; and he has seen it 
hunting its fugitive victims as if they were brute 
beasts. This " relation," as thus developed and sys- 
tematized, he has found to have been originated by 
the piratical African slave-trade, as commenced by 
the infamous John Hawkins, yet extending itself 
over Indians and white persons, and fostering in the 
heart of our boasted republic a slave-trade more 
demoralizing than that on the African coast. 



396 THE AMEEICAX SLATE CODE. 

This so-called " legal relation," as thus defined and 
described, he will have found to be the very same 
that is daily declared to be a blameless and innocent 
one, involving no guilt in those who "hold" and 
"sustain" it. 

The attentive reader has further seen how this 
"relation" of slave ownership has shaped and deter- 
mined the "relation" of the slave to society and to 
civil government ; how it bars his access to the judi 
ciary, denying his capacity to be a party to a civil 
suit ; how it bids the Courts reject the testimony not 
only of slaves^ but of free coloi^ed persons; how it 
enforces the subjection of slaves not only to their 
"owners" and overseers, but to all other white per- 
sons; how it frames and executes unjust and in- 
human penal enactments against the slaves; how it 
forbids their education, their religious instruction 
and free social worship ; and, finally, how it inter- 
poses obstacles to manumissions by the master, and 
to acts of emancipation by the State. 

The same "relation" of slave ownership he has 
found waging successful warfare upon the liberties 
of the free, degrading the free people of color, and 
dragging them back into chattelhood; despoiling 
the free whites of the South, not excepting slave- 
holders themselves, of some of the essential rights 
of humanity, freedom of speech and of the press, 
the right of propagating true religion, and of re- 
ducing it to practice by deeds of justice and mercy 
to the oppressed; extending the same iron sway 
over the free citizens of the North, and bidding the 



CONCLUDIXG CHAPTER. 397 

sons of the Pilgrims dishonor their sires, by joining 
in the hunt after fugitive slaves. 

All this the attentive readers of the preceding 
pages have witnessed. The writer will not insult 
them by asking them whether they consider such a 
"relation," with such a paternity, with such a cha- 
racter, and with such fruits, an innoceiU one, reposing 
upon the foundation of apostles and patriarchs, the 
Bible its charter, the Founder of Christianity its chief 
corner-stone ! But he wishes to propound to them, 
for their consideration and decision, a few plain and 
important practical questions. 

Is it not high time that the churches of this coun- 
try, of all sects, their members and ministry, were 
purged from the sin of slaveholding, and from the 
taint of religious fraternity with slaveholders ? 

If this system and sum of abominations is to be 
tolerated in the Church, Avhat description of prac- 
tices, what crimes should be excluded from her pale 
and debarred from her communion? Is it theft? Is 
it robbery ? Is it cruelty? Is it murder? Is it man- 
stealing? Is it extortion? Is it adultery? Is it 
bloody persecution ? Is it using a neighbor's service 
without wages, and giving him naught for his work? 
Is it violence? Is it fraud? Is it despising the 
poor? Is it taking away the key of knowledge? 
Is it proscribing Bibles, and forbidding free religious 
worship? Is it upholding, abetting, and sustaining 
all these combined ? 

K these are to be excluded from religious com- 
munion and fellowship, must not the so-called "legal 



898 THE AMERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

relation of master and slave" be excluded likewise, 
by excluding those who resolutely persist in sustain- 
ing it? Can the former be done without doing the 
latter ? And if it be left undone, what must become 
of the Church ? Will not the salt lose its savor ? 
And what will it then be good for, but to be cast out 
and trodden under foot of men ? Is there nothing 
in the signs of the times that gives significance to 
these questions ? How long shall infidelity be armed 
with the most powerful of all weapons against the 
Bible and Christianity, against the Ministry and the 
Church? 

If the reader be a Christian, will not his regard for 
Christianity suggest to him the proper answer to 
these inquiries ? And if he be not a Christian, would 
he not, nevertheless, desire to see the most potent of 
all social influences — that of the prevailing religion 
of the country — arrayed against this stupendous sys- 
tem of inhumanity and wrong ? 

If the Saviour of men was manifested " that he 
might destroy the works" of the Devil, and "proclaim 
deliverance to the captives ;" if his disciples are his 
witnesses, and engaged in the prosecution of his work, 
are they not bound to "have no fellowship with the 
works of darkness, but rather reprove them ?" Es- 
pecially, are not his ministers bound to "cry aloud 
and spare not ; to lift up their voice like a trumpet ; 
to show the people their transgression, and the house 
of Jacob their sin ?" If such an iniquity as the hold- 
ing of humanity in chattelhood may escape their 
rebukes, what form of wickedness may not claim 



CONCLUDING CHAPTER. 899 

equal exemption ? What commandment of tlie laiy, 
what precept of the gospel, what principle of the 
Christian theology is not set at naught by the en- 
slaver ? What meaning can there be in the words 
justice or mercy^ what significance in the doctrine of 
human brgtherhood, or what force in the precepts, 
"Love thy neighbor as thyself," "Kemember them 
that are in bonds, as bound with them," and "Go teach 
all nations," if the practice of enslaving immortal 
men, for whom Christ died, and of whose nature he 
is partaker, is not to be condemned ; if the cause of 
the slave is not to be vindicated ; if the oppressor is 
not to be called to repentance ; if his victim is not to 
be taught and disenthralled? 

Is it not mockery to pra}', "Thy kingdom come," 
and yet neglect engaging in labors like these ? If 
the work of elevating depressed humanity be Christ's 
work, should not the "undoing of the heavy bur- 
thens," and " letting the oppressed go free," be the 
work of Christians, the mission of the Church of 
Christ ? 

Turning next to the responsibilities of citizens, of 
society, of civil government, of legislators, and of 
magistrates, we demand whether the crime of enslav- 
ing and embruting a human being ought not to be 
promptly and vigorously suppressed by the strong 
arm of penal law ? If not, what crime or what out- 
rage against humanity ought to be thus suppressed ? 
Shall a man be punished for stealing an ox, or for 
knowingly receiving, appropriating, and using a 
stolen ox, and yet be suffered with impunity to steal 



400 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

or receive, appropriate and use a stolen man ? Will 
the laAv pretend to protect my rights oi property, and 
yet refuse to protect my ^;er5onaZ right to myself? By 
Avhat authority, by what rule, on what principle, with 
what consistency, and with what ultunate success, 
will the law, or the administrators and expounders 
of law, attempt to maintain, by the sanctions of penal 
infliction, the rights of white men, while they refuse 
thus to maintain the rights of black, or yellow, or 
SWARTHY, or BROWK men ? Upon what maxims of 
civil law or of the science of jurisprudence will they 
proceed in doing this ? Or will they proclaim to the 
world that there is no such thing as " legal science;" 
that the pretense of it is a cheat ; that the belief in it 
is a delusion ; that jurisprudence is a game of chance ; 
that law rests upon caprice, and interposes no obsta- 
cle to aggression, no protection from brute force, no 
guaranties against despotic power ? K this be the 
decision of grave jurists, who will care to have 
jurists? Who will be grateful for the institution 
of civil government ? Who will respect the magis- 
tracy ? Who luill venerate law ? How shall civil 
government, jurisprudence, and law be vindicated 
from aspersion and shielded from execration and con- 
tempt, but by wielding them for their high and holy 
ends ? How, indeed, shall this be done but by deny- 
ing to the American Slave Code (instinct, as it is, 
with all the elements of inherent lawlessness) any 
just claim to the honors or the authority of valid 
law? What, after all, becomes of the boasted legality 
of slave ownership, and where is the legal validity 



CONCLUDING CHAPTER. 401 

of the American Slave Code in the presence of such 
legal decisions and common law maxims as the fol- 
lowing ? 

^'Statutes against fundamental morality are voidJ^ 
(Judge McLean. Supreme Court of the United 
States.) 

Is not the Slave Code " against fundamental mo- 
rality?" If it is not^ what existing or conceivable 
statute could come under that description, or of what 
use is the maxim ? But if the Slave Code is "against 
fundamental morality," have not the people a claim 
upon Judge McLean and the United States Supreme 
Court for a decision affirming the illegality of slave 
ownership, whenever a suitable case shall be pre- 
sented for their consideration and action ? 

"T/' it he found that a former decision is manifestli/ 
absurd and unjust, ii is declared, NOT that such a sen- 
tence teas BAD lata, but thai it ivas Not law." (Littleton.) 

Are not the "decisions" in support of slavery, as 
cited in this volume, "manifestly absurd and un- 
just ? " If not, what recorded or conceivable decisions 
could be thus characterized ? But if they are of that 
character, does not the maxim of Littleton call for 
judicial decisions declarmg "not that such sentence 
was BAD law, but that it was not law V 

"Will it be said that time and precedent have so 
settled the law on this subject that it must not or 
cannot be disturbed ? 

"Where the foundation is weak, the structure 
falls." "What is invcdid from the beginning cannot 
be made vcdid by length of time." (Noyes' Maxims.) 



402 THE AINIERICAX SLAVE CODE. 

"Will it be said tliat statutes and judicial decisions 
set aside or modify natural or common law ? It is 
of the very nature of natural or common law to con- 
tradict this plea ! Hear it : 

"The law of nature being coeval with mankind, 
and dictated by God himself, is, of course, superior 
in obligation to every other. It is binding all over 
the globe, in all countries, and at all times. No hu- 
man laivs have ANY VALIDITY if contrary to THIS; 
and such of them as are valid derive all their 
force, mediately or immediately, from this original." 
(Fortescne.) 

" The inferior must give place to the superior ; 
man's laws to God's laws. If, therefore, any statute 
be enacted contrary to iliese^ it ought to be considered 
of NO AUTHORITY in the laws of England." (Xoyes.) 

" If any human law shall allow or require us to 
commit crime, we are bound to transgress that human 
law, or else we must ofi'end against both the natural 
and the divine." (Blackstone.) 

" "When an Act of Parliament is against common 
right or reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be 
performed, the common lata loill control it, and adjudge 
such act to be void." (Coke.) 

"Will it be said that common or natural law may 
possibly allow the practice of slaveholding ? 

"Those rights which God and nature have estab- 
lished, and which are therefore called natural rights, 
such as life and liberty, need not the aid of human 
laws to be more effectually vested in every man than 
they are, neither do they receive any additional 



CONCLUDIXG CHAPTER. 403 

strength Avlien declared by the municipal law to be 
inviolable. On the contrary, no human legislation 
has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the owner 
himself has committed some act that amounts to a 
forfeiture." (Fortescue.) 

" The law, therefore, which supports slavery and 
opposes liberty, must necessarily be condemned as 
cruel, for every feeling of human nature advocates 
liberty. Slavery is introduced by human wicked- 
ness, but God advocates liberty by the natm-e which 
he has given to man." (Fortescue.) 

Much more might be quoted from the great lumi- 
naries of common law to the same point. Can there 
be any douht on the question of the legality of 
slavery ? If so, the common laAv rule of decision is 
simjole : 

" Whenever the question of liberty seems doubtful, 
the decision must be in favor of liberty.'^ (Digest.) 

The remedy for slavery and its untold abomina- 
tions and horrors is simple. It is so simple, that 
worldly wisdom (which is foolishness with God, and 
which bewilders itself in its own never-ending la- 
byrinths) thinks it complex and difficult. It is 
merely to cease doing evil, and to commence doing 
right. It is for the Government to " break every yoke 
and let the oppressed go free" — to "proclaim liberty 
throughout the land to all the inhabitants thereof" — 
to " execute judgment between a man and his neigh- 
bor," and "deliver the spoiled out of the hands of 
the oppressor." It is for the citizens to "bring the 
poor that are cast out to their own house, and not 



404 THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE. 

hide themselves from their own flesh ;" to •welcome 
them to a residence "among" them "where thej 
shall choose," " where it liketh them best." It is for 
the "masters" to "render unto their servants that 
which is just and equal," "for the laborer is worthy 
of his reward." It is for the voters, who are the 
sovereign people, to choose "judges and officers" 
who shall "judge the people with just judgment," 
remembering that " he that ruleth over men must be 
just, ruling in the fear of God." If the tenure of 
slave property be illegal, let the Courts thus decide. 
If not, or if the judges dechne doing their duty, 
let the legislators abolish slavery by statute. In 
either case, let them repeal their own unrighteous 
enactments. Let those who need the labor of the 
colored people employ them for honest wages, and 
leave off living by plunder. 

This is God's own remedy for slavery. Experi- 
ment has fully tested its safety and its benefits, till 
those who had not learned to confide in God and 
walk by faith have been compelled to recognize his- 
torical facts, and may, at least, walk by siglit. 

A moderate measure of historical information and 
common sense, one Avould think, might suffice (with 
the single eye that causes the whole body to be full 
of light) to detect the follv, the absurdity, and the 
inefficiency of all those schemes by which, on this 
particular subject, men have sought to reach the 
ends or results of justice and honesty without the 
task of their self-denying exercise. The attempt to 
kill the poisonous tree of slavery by lopping off a 



COXCLUDIXG CHAPTER. 405 

few of its more unsightly branches — the subtle but 
short-sighted diplomacy that seeks to outwit the 
arch-enemy of humanity and fritter away his power 
by temporizing expedients and conciliatory compro- 
mises — the policy of conceding the innocency of the 
so-called legal relation while raising an outcry against 
its component parts, the particulars in which it con- 
sists, the incidents by which it is defined — the in- 
veterate day-dream of suppressing the traffic in human 
beings without overturning human cliaitelhood^ or of 
preventing the extension of slavery so long as it is 
suffered to exist — the delusion that the circumscrib- 
ing of its boundaries (if it were 23racticable) would 
be equivalent to its abolition or secure its termina- 
tion — the notion that national neutrality can uproot 
a national sin, or excuse from its abandonment ; or 
that there can be such a thing as a republican 
Government maintaining neutrality concerning the 
chattelhood of its citizens — above all, the expedient 
of exporting the oppressed^ instead of ceasing from 
and overturning oppression — these are some of the 
fallacies of our times which, in generations to come, 
will be cited as exemplifications of the bewilderment 
introduced by the presence of slavery. 

In conclusion, the writer would urge on all classes 
of his readers the claims of the enslaved. What 
portion of the community, or what description of 
human beings should be exempted from the appeal, 
or excused from earnest efforts in their favor ? 

Lives there the vian who could justify himself in 
the retirement of his own heart, should his own con- 



406 THE AMERICAN SLATE CODE. 

science convict him of coldness and indifference 
concerning the chaitelhood of man ? Could he help 
despising himself, and sinking, in his own estimate 
of himself, to the level of the servile slave, or the 
dulncss of the unthinking brute ? Lives there the 
icoman, with a woman's heart and a woman's love, 
whose inmost soul does not bleed at the wrongs of 
the slave? How could the Avoman be lovely or 
attract virtuous love who should fail to do this? 
How could she respect herself, how could a wise and 
maulj husband confide in her, or how could she 
claim for herself the respect due to a woman, should 
she be justly charged or suspected of indifference 
when Avoman shrieks under the lash, when woman's 
affections are outraged, when woman is torn from 
husband and child, when woman is crushed and 
polluted by lawless and domineering lust, when 
woman is transformed to a beast? Is there the cir- 
cumspect and self-respecting woman who would be- 
stow her affections and repose her confiding hopes 
upon the man who should betray an indifference to 
such wrongs inflicted upon woman? 

Is there a patriot, a lover of his country, who can 
be indifferent to the existence and the sway of the 
Slave Code ; who does not blush at the national dis- 
grace, and tremble, as did Jefilsrson, in view of im- 
pending judgments incurred by the national sin ? 

Is there a wise statesman who fails to foresee the 
ruin of his country and the wreck of its free insti- 
tutions, imless the leprosy can be healed ? 

Can the political economist be unconcerned, when 



CONCLUDING CHAPTER. 407 

he witnesses tliis incubus upon the pecuniary pros- 
perity of the republic — this paralysis of the nation's 
strength. 

Can the friend of education, the patron of intel- 
lectual progress, neglect to protest against the en- 
forcement of ignorance, the proscription of letters, 
the closing of every avenue to the intellects of 
increasing millions of his countrymen ? Can he do 
otherwise than dej)lore and condemn the code that 
prevents the establishment and prosperity of schools 
and colleges for whites, while it forbids the elements 
of literature and science to the people of color ? 

Is there the wise legislator, civilian, or jurist, 
who does not see and condemn, in the Slave Code, 
the opprobrium of legislation, the disgrace of juris- 
prudence, the subversion of equity, the promotion of 
lawlessness, the element of social insecurity, and the 
seeds of every crime which legislation and juris- 
prudence should suppress or restrain ? 

Can the moralist look with unconcern upon a sys- 
tem that fosters every vice, and represses every 
virtue ; that opens the flood-gates of immorality, 
and shuts up every fountain of enlightenment and 
reformation ? 

Can the patrons of Christian missions do less than 
condemn the code that closes the avenues of mis- 
sionary enterprise against millions of their own coun- 
trymen? Can distributors of Bibles and religious 
tracts fail to remonstrate with the supporters of a 
system that forbids the distribution and the reading 
of them ? Can Christians, can Christian ministers 



408 THE A:\rERIGAN SLAVE CODE. 

and churches be silent witnesses of all this enforced 
heathenism in our midst? Can they regard with 
apathy or disfavor the effort to relieve from the 
condition of chattelhood so many millions of pre- 
cious souls for whom Christ died ? 

Every dictate of our common humanity, every 
impulse of unperverted human sympathy, every de- 
duction of unsophisticated reason, every monition 
of enlightened conscience, every maxim of sound 
political wisdom, every conclusion of a far-reaching 
and prophetic prudence, every princij^le and pre- 
cept of our holy religion, every aspiration after a 
likeness to the blessed Kedeemer and the Universal 
Father, every desire and hope of the onward pro- 
gress and elevation of our country and our species, 
unitedly impel us to espouse, earnestly and cour- 
ageously, the cause of the enslaved. 

Let each reader be persuaded to do this, by con- 
siderations derived from all that is precious in human 
nature, or sacred in impartial justice ; by all that is 
binding in moral obli2:ation and law, or ennoblinor 
and God-like in mercy ; by all that is attractive in 
human virtue, and inestimable in human freedom ; 
by all that is momentous in a state of earthly proba- 
tion, and solemn in the linal judgment, when it will 
be said to those who withhold needed kindness, 
" Inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of the least of 
these, my brethren, ye did it not unto me." 



appe:n'dix a. 



FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL OF 1850. 

An Act to amend, and Supplementary to the Act entitled, 
"An Act respecting Fugitives from Justice, and Persons 
escaping from the service of their masters," approved 
February 12, 1793. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and Rouse of Representatices of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
persons who have been, or may hereafter be, appointed com- 
missioners, in virtue of any Act of Congi-ess, by the Circuit 
Courts of the United States, and who, in consequence of such 
appointment, are authorized to exercise the powers that any 
justice of the peace or other magistrate of any of the United 
States may exercise in respect to offenders for any crime or 
offense against the United States, by arresting, imprisoning, or 
bailing the same under and by virtue of the thirty-third section 
of the Act of the twenty-fourth of September, seventeen hundred 
and eighty-nine, entitled, "An Act to establish the judicial 
courts of the United States," shall be, and are hereby authorized 
and required to exercise and discharge all the powers and duties 
conferred by this Act. 

Sec 2. And be it farther enacted, That the Superior Court of 

each organized Territory of the United States shall have the 

same power to appoint commissioners to take acknowledgments 

of bail and affidavit, and to take depositions of witnesses in 

18 



410 APPENDIX. 

civil causes, which is now possessed by the Circuit Courts of the 
United States ; and all commissioners who shall hereafter be 
appointed for such purposes by the Superior Court of any 
organized Territory of the United States shall possess all the 
powers and exercise all the duties conferred by law upon the 
commissioners appointed by the Circuit Courts of the United 
States for similar purposes, and shall moreover exercise and 
discharge all the powers and duties conferred by this Act. 

Sec. 3. And he it further enacted, That the Circuit Courts of 
the United States, and the Superior Courts of each organized 
Territory of the United States, shall from time to time enlarge 
the number of commissioners, with a view to afford reasonable 
facilities to reclaim fugitives from labor, and to the prompt dis- 
charge of the duties imposed by this Act. 

Sec 4. And be it further enacted, That the commissioners 
above named shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the judges 
of the Circuit and District Courts of the United States, in their 
respective circuits and districts within the several States, and 
the judges of the Superior Courts of the Territories, severally 
and collectively, in term time and vacation; and shall grant 
certificates to such claimants, upon satisfactory proof being 
made, with authority to take and remove such fugitives from 
service or labor, under the restrictions herein contained, to the 
State or Territory from which such persons may have escaped 
or fled. 

Sec. 5. And J>e it further enacted, That it shall be the duty 
of all marshals and deputy marshals to obey and execute all 
warrants and precepts issued under the provisions of this Act, 
when to them directed; and should any marshal or deputy 
marshal refuse to receive such warrant or other process, when 
tendered, or to use all proper means diligent))' to execute the 
same, he shall, on conviction thereof, be fined in the sum of one 
thousand dollars to the use of such claimant, on the motion of 
such claimant, by the Circuit or District Court for the district of 
such marshal ; and after arrest of such fugitive by such mar- 
shal or his dcput}', or whilst at any time in his custody, under 
the provisions of this Act, should such fugitive escape, whether 



APPEXDIX. 411 

with or without the assent of such marshal or his deputy, such 
ni:irshal shall be liable, on his official bond, to be prosecuted, 
for the benefit of such claimant, for tlie full value of the service 
or labor of said fugitive in the State, Territory, or district 
whence he escaped ; and the better to enable the said commis- 
sioners, when thus appointed, to execute their duties faithfully 
and efficiently, in conformity with the requirements of the Con- 
stitution of the United States and of this Act, they arc hereby 
authorized and empowered, within their counties respectively, 
to appoint in writing under their hands, any one or more suita- 
ble persons, from time to time, to execute all such warrants and 
other process as may be issued by them in the lawful perform- 
ance of their respective duties ; with an authority to such com- 
missioners, or the persons to be appointed by them to execute 
process as aforesaid, to summon and call to their aid the by- 
standers or ^:)(>«se comitatus of the proper county, when ne- 
cessary to insure a faithful observance of the clause of the 
Constitution referred to, in conformity with the provisions of 
this Act ; and all good citizens are hereby commanded to aid and 
assist in the prompt and efficient execution of this law, when- 
ever their services may be required, as aforesaid, for that purpose ; 
and said warrants shall run and be executed by said officers 
any where in the State within which they are issued. 

Sec. 6. And be it further enacted^ That when a person held 
to service or labor in any State or Territory of the United 
States has heretofore or shall hereafter escape into another State 
or Territory of the United States, the person or persons to 
whom such service or labor may be due, or his, her, or their 
agent or attorney, duly authorized, by power of attorney, in 
writing, acknowledged and certified under the seal of some 
legal office or court of the State or Territory in which the same 
may be executed, may pursue and reclaim such fugitive person, 
either by procuring a warrant from some one of the courts, 
judges, or commissioners aforesaid, of the proper circuit, district 
or county, for the apprehension of such fugitive from service or 
labor, or b}'^ seizing and arresting such fugitive where the same 
can be done without process, and by taking and causing such 



412 APPENDIX. 

person to be taken forthwith before such court, judge or com- 
missioner, whose duty it shall be to hear and determine the 
case of such claimant in a summary manner ; and upon satis- 
factory proof being made, by deposition or affidavit, in writing, 
to be taken and certified bj' such court, judge, or commissioner, 
or by other satisfactory testimony, duly taken and certified by 
some court, magistrate, justice of the peace, or other legal officer 
authorized to administer an oath and take depositions under 
the laws of the State or Territory from which such person 
owing service or labor may have escaped, with a certificate of 
such magistracy or other authority, as aforesaid, with the seal 
of the proper court or officer thereto attached, which seal shall 
be sufficient to establish the competency of the proof, and with 
proof, also by affidavit, of the identity of the person whose 
service or labor is claimed to be due as aforesaid, that the per- 
son so arrested does in fact owe service or labor to the person 
or persons claiming him or her, in the State or Territor}" from 
which such fugitive may have escaped as aforesaid, and that 
said person escaped, to make out and deliver to such claimant, 
his or her agent or attorne}^ a certificate setting forth the sub- 
stantial facts as to the service or labor due from such fugitive to 
the claimant, and of his or her escape from the State or Terri- 
tory in which such service or labor was due to the State or 
Territory in which he or she was arrested, with authority to 
such claimant, or his or her agent or attorney, to use such 
reasonable force and restraint as may be necessary under the 
circumstances of the case, to take and remove such fugitive 
person back to the State or Territory from whence he or she 
may have escaped as aforesaid. In no trial or hearing under 
this Act shall the testimony of such alleged fugitive be admitted 
in evidence ; and the certificates in this and the first section 
mentioned shall be conclusive of the right of the person or 
persons in whose favor granted to remove such fugitive to the 
State or Territory from which he escaped, and shall prevent all 
molestation of said person or persons by anj^ process issued by 
any court, judge, magistrate, or other person whomsoever. 
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That any person who 



APPENDIX. 413 

shall knowingly and willingly obstruct, hinder, or prevent such 
claimant, his agent or attorney, or any person or persons law- 
fully assisting him, her, or them, from arresting such fugitive 
from service or labor, either with or without process as afore- 
said ; or shall rescue, or attempt to rescue, such fugitive from 
service or labor, from the custody of such claimant, his or her 
agent or attorney, or other person or persons lawfully assisting 
as aforesaid, when so arrested, pursuant to the authority herein 
given and declared ; or shall aid, abet, or assist such person, so 
owing service or labor as aforesaid, directly or indirectly, to 
escape from such claimant, his agent or attorney, or other per- 
son or pei-sons, legally authorized as aforesaid; or shall harbor 
or conceal such fugitive, so as to prevent the discovery and 
arrest of such person, after notice or knowledge of the fact that 
such person was a fugitive from service or labor as aforesaid, 
shall, for either of said offenses, be subject to a fine not exceed- 
ing one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding six 
months, by indictment and conviction before the District Court 
of the United States forthe district in which such offense may 
have been committed, or before the proper court of criminal 
jurisdiction, if committed within any one of the organized Ter- 
ritories of the United States ; and shall moreover forfeit and 
pay, by way of civil damages to the party injured by such ille- 
gal conduct, the sum of one thousand dollars for each fugitive 
so lost as aforesaid, to be recovered by action of debt in any of 
the District or Territorial Courts aforesaid, within whose juris- 
diction the said offense may have been committed. 

Sec. 8. And he it further enacted, That the marshals, their 
deputies, and the clerks of the said District and Territorial 
Courts, shall be paid for their services the like fees as may be 
allowed to them for similar services in other cases ; and where 
such services are rendered exclusively in the arrest, custody, 
and delivery of the fugitive to the claimant, his or her agent or 
attorney, or where such supposed fugitive may be discharged 
out of custody for the want of suflBcient proof as aforesaid, then 
such fees are to be paid in the whole by such claimant, his 
agent or attorney ; and in all cases where the proceedings are 



414 APPENDIX. 

before a commissioner, he shall be entitled to a fee of ten dol- 
lars in full for his services in each case, upon the delivery of the 
said certiticate to the claimant, his or her agent or attorney ; or 
a fee of five dollars in cases where the proof shall not, in the 
opinion of such commissioner, warrant such certiticate and 
deliver}', inclusive of all services incident to such arrest and 
examination, to be paid in either case by the claimant, his or 
her agent or attorney. The person or persons authorized to 
execute the process to be issued by such commissioners for the 
arrest and detention of fugitives from service or labor as afore- 
said, shall also be entitled to a foe of five dollars each for each 
person he or they may arrest and take before any such commis- 
sioner as aforesaid at the instance and request of such claimant, 
with such other fees as may be deemed reasonable by such 
commissioner for such other additional services as may be ne- 
cessarily performed by him or them : such as attending to the 
examination, keeping the fugitive in custody, and providing him 
with food and lodging during his detention, and until the final 
determination of such commissioner; and in general for per- 
forming such other duties as may be required by such claimant, 
his or her attorney or agent, or commissioner in the premises; 
such fees to be made up in conformity with the fees usually 
charged by the officers of the courts of justice within the 
proper district or county, as near as may be practicable, and 
paid by such claimants, their agents or attorneys, whether such 
supposed fugitive from service or labor be ordered to be de- 
livered to such claimants by the final determination of such 
commissioners or not. 

Sec. 9. And he it further enacted. That upon affidavit made 
by the claimant of such fugitive, his agent or attorney, after 
such certificate has been issued, that he has reason to apprehend 
.that such fugitive will be rescued by force from his or their 
possession before he can be taken beyond the limits of the State 
in which the arrest is made, it shall be the duty of tlie oflBcer 
making the arrest to retain such fugitive in his custody, and to 
remove him to the State whence he fiod, and there to deliver 
him to said claimant, his agent or attorney. And to this end 



APPENDIX. 415 

the officer aforesaid is hereby authorized and required to employ 
so many persons as he may deem necessary to overcome such 
force, and to retain them in his service so long as circumstances 
may require ; the said officer and his assistants, while so em- 
ployed, to receive the same compensation, and to be allowed the 
same expenses as are now allowed by law for the transportation 
of criminals, to be certified by the judge of the district within 
which the arrest is made, and paid out of the trcasurj'^ of the 
United States. 

Sec. 10. And le it further enacted. That when any person 
held to service or labor in any State or Territory, or in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia, shall escape therefrom, the party to whom 
such service or labor shall be due, his, her, or their agent or 
attorney, may apply to any court of record therein, or judge 
thereof in vacation, and make satisfactory proof to such court, 
or judge in vacation, of the escape aforesaid, and that the per- 
son escaping owed service or labor to such party. Whereupon 
the court shall cause a record to be made of the matters so 
proved, and also a general description of the person so escaping, 
with such convenient certainty as may be ; and a transcript of 
such record, authenticated by the attestation of the clerk, and 
of the seal of the said court, being produced in any other State, 
Territory, or district in which the person so escaping may be 
found, and being exhibited to any judge, commissioner, or other 
officer authorized by the law of the United States to cause per- 
sons escaping from service or labor to be delivered up, shall be 
held and taken to be full and conclusive evidence of the fact of 
escape, and that the service or labor of the person escaping is 
due to the party in such record mentioned. And upon the pro- 
duction by the said party of other and further evidence, if 
necessary, either oral or by affidavit, in addition to what is 
contained in the said record, of the identity of the person escap- 
ing, he or she shall be delivered up to the claimant. And the 
said court, commissioner, judge, or other person autliorized by 
this Act to grant certificates to claimants of fugitives, shall, upon 
the production of the record and other evidences aforesaid, grant 
to such claimant a certificate of his right to take any such 



416 APPENDIX 

person identified and proved to be owing service or labor as 
aforesaid, which certificate shall authorize such claimant to 
seize or arrest and transport such person to the State or Terri- 
tory from which he escaped: Provided, That nothing herein 
contained shall be construed as requiring the production of a 
transcript of such record as evidence as aforesaid ; but in its 
absence, the claim shall be heard and determined upon other 
satisfactory proofs competent in law. 

HOWELL COBB, 
SpeaTcer of the House of JRepresentatives. 

WILLIAM R. KING, 
President of the Senate, pro tempore. 

Approved September 18th, 1850. 
MILLIARD FILLMORE. 



APPENDIX B. 



SLAVERY AMONG THE CHEROKEES AND CHOCTAWS. 

Since the body of the preceding work was mostly in type, 
the author has met with a volume containing the Constitutions 
and Laws of the Cherokees and Choctaws, which embrace 
many provisions on the subject of Slavery, very similar to those 
of our American Slave States in their vicinity, and evidently 
borrowed from them. A few specimens may be interesting, 
especially as throwing light upon the question whether it is 
proper to assist in building up churches in those nations that 
admit and retain as members those who enact, administer, and 
support such laws, or who uphold them by claiming and sus- 
taining the relation of slave owners. 

THE CHEROKEES. 

The " Constitution of the Cherokee Nation," formed by a 
Convention of Delegates from the several districts at New- 
Echota, July, 1827, contains the following: 

" No person shall be eligible to a seat in General Council but 
a free Cherokee male citizen, who shall have attained to the 
age of twenty-five years. The descendants of Cherokee men 
by all free women, except the African race, whose parents may 
[have] been living together as man and wife, according to the 
customs and laws of this nation, shall be entitled to all the 
rights and privileges of this nation, as well as the posterity of 
18* 



418 APPEXDIX, 

Cherokee women by all free men. Ko person who is of negro 
or mulatto parentage, either hy the father or mother side, shall 
he eligible to hold any office of profit, honor, or trust in this 
Government." (Art. III., sect. 4.) 

The same provision is retained in the New Constitution of 
the Cherokee Nation, passed at Tah-le-quah, in Sept. 1839. 
(Art. III., sect. 5.) 

Among the laws of the Cherokees we find one, Sept. 1839, 
entitled, "An act to prevent amalgamation with colored persons," 
(meaning descendants of Africans,) just as if Cherokees were 
whites, and not " colored." Penalty, corporal punishment, not 
to exceed fiftj' stripes, and such intermarriages declared not to 
be lawful. 

Another "Act," under date of Nov. 15, 1843, is " to legalize 
intermarriage with icliite men !" 

Another Act, 7th Nov. 1840, declares that " it shall not be 
lawful for anj' free negro or mulatto, not of Cherolccc Hood, to 
hold or own any improvement within the limits of this nation ; 
neither shall it be lawful for slaves to own any property of the 
following description, viz : horses, cattle, hogs, or fire-arms." 
Provision is made for the seizure and sale of such property, &c. 

Another "Act," Oct. 19, 1841, is for " authorizing the ap- 
pointment of patrol companies," who "shall take up and bring 
to punishment any negro or negroes that may be strolling about, 
not on their owner's premises, without a pass from their owner 
or owners." And any negro not entitled to Cherokee privileges, 
if found armed, may be whipped, not exceeding thirty-nino 
lashes. 

Another "Act," dated 22d October, 1841, is for "prohibiting 
the teaching of negroes to read and write." "Be it enacted by 
the Kational Council, That from and after the passage of this 
Act, it shall not be lawful for any person or persons whatever 
to teach any free negro or negroes not of CheroTcec blood,* or 

* "iVb< of Cherokee blood ! " It would be quite an improvement, 
should our Anglo-Saxon slave legislators imitate this by saying, "710^ 
of English blood," in their statutes of this cbaiacter. 



APPENDIX. 419 

any slave belonging to any citizen or citizens of the nation, to 
read or write." The penalty annexed to a violation of this 
enactment is a fine of $100 to $500, at the discretion of the 
Court trying the ofifense. 

"An Act in regard to free negroes," Dec. 2, 1842, directs 
" the sheriffs of the several districts" to notify free negroes to 
leave the limits of the nation by the 1st of Jan. 1843. If they 
refused to go, they were to be immediately expelled. " Sect, 4. ■ 
Be it further enacted. That should any free negro or negroes be 
found guilty of aiding, abetting, or decoying any slave or slaves 
to leave his or their owner or employer, such fi-ee negro or 
negroes shall receive for each and every such offense one hun- 
dred lashes on the bare back, and be immediately removed 
from this nation." 

Bound up in the same volume with these Constitutions and 
enactments, we find the " Constitution -of the Cherokee Bible 
Society," in which is the following : "Art. 2. The object of the 
Society shall be to disseminate the Sacred Sci-iptures in the 
English and Cherokee languages among the people of the 
Cherokee nation ; and all funds collected by the Society shall 
be expended for that object." 

From the preceding extracts of the Constitutions and Laws 
it would seem that " free negroes and mulattoes not of Cherokee 
blood" were not considered as " entitled to Cherokee privileges," 
or as constituting a part of " the Cherokee nation." And the 
teaching of them or the slaves to read or write, as has been 
shown, is expressly forbidden, under heavy penalties. So that 
the peculiar phraseology employed by the Bible Society is 
readily understood. Its object did not include the supply of 
such persons, and it was intended to guard against any such 
use of its funds ! It is lamentable to sec a nation so recently 
put in possession of the Bible, so forward to withhold it from 
others, even forbidding its use ! But in this the Cherokees only 
imitate our own nation and our own Bible Societies, from whom 
they have received the Scriptures ! They have only practised 
the religion they have received from us ! We may see in this 



420 APPENDIX. 

the fruit of sending to the heathen a gospel that tolerates slave- 
holding. 

CHOCTAWS. 

The Constitution of the Choctaw Xation, approved October, 
1838, embodies a "Declaration of Rights," the first article of 
which commences with, "All freemen^ when they form a social 
compact, are equal in rights," kz. It is not difficult to trace the 
parentage of this emendation of the Declaration of '76. It is 
revealed in the following : 

"From and after the adoption of this Constitution, no free 
negro, or any part negro, unconnected with Choctaxc or Chick- 
asaiD hlood, shall be permitted to come and settle in the Choc- 
taw nation." (Art. VIII., sect. G.) 

" No person who is any part negro shall ever be allowed to 
hold any office under this Government." (Art. YIII., sect. 14.) 

"The General Council, when in session, shall have the power 
by law to naturalize and adopt as citizens of this nation, any 
Indian, or descendant of other Indian tribes, except a negro or 
descendant of a negro." (Art. VIII., sect. 15.) 

The following is an act approved 5th October, 1836 : 

"i?e it enacted, &c., That from and after the passage of this 
Act, if any citizen of the United States, acting as a missionary 
or a preacher, or whatever his occupation may be, is found to 
take an active part in favoring the principles and notions of the 
most fatal and destructive doctrines of Abolitionism, he shall 
be compelled to leave the nation, and for ever stay out of it. 

^'■Be it further enacted, &c.. That teaching slaves how to 
read, to write, or to sing in meeting-houses or schools, or in any 
open place, without the consent of the owner, or allowing them 
to sit at table with him, shall be sufficient ground to convict 
persons of favoring the principles and notions of Abolitionism. 

It was provided also that no slave should " be in possession of 
any property or arms ;" that if any slave infringed any Choc- 
taw rights, he should " be driven out of company to behave 
himself;" and in case of his return and further intrusion, "he 



APPENDIX. 421 

should receive ten lashes." But "any good honest slave shall be 
permitted to carry a gun, by having a pass from his master." 

In 1838 it was enacted, "That from and after the passage of 
this law, if any person or persons, citizens of this nation, shall 
piiMichj take up with a negro slave* he or she so oflfending 
shall be liable to pay a fine of not less than ten dollars, nor ex- 
ceeding twenty -five dollars, and xhall be separated; and for a 
second offense of a similar nature the party shall receive not 
exceeding thirty-nine lashes nor less than five, on the bare 
back, and shall be separated, as the Court may determine." 

"The Constitution and Laws of the Choctaw Nation," from 
which the preceding extracts are taken, bears the imprint of 
1840, and the latest enactments it contains are dated Oct. 1839. 
But the "American Missionary," New-York, January, 1853, 
contains an account of some later enactments, taken from a 
Report made in 1848 by Mr. Treat, one of the Secretaries of 
the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. 
The following is an extract from this statement of the "Ame- 
rican Missionary :" 

In 1840 "it was enacted that all free negroes in the nation, 
unconnected with the Choctaw or Chickasaw blood, ' should 
leave the nation by the first of March, 1841,' and 'for ever 
keep out of it' In case of their infringing this law, ' they 
were to be seized and sold to the highest bidder for life.' It 
was also enacted that if any citizen of the nation hired, con- 
cealed, or in any way protected any free negro, to evade the 
foregoing provision, he should forfeit from $250 to $500, or if 
unable to pay this fine, ' receive fifty lashes on his bare back.' 

"In 1846 a law was passed, which prohibited all negroes, 
whether they had ' papers' or not, from entering and remain- 
ing in the Choctaw nation. The offenders were to receive ' not 
less than one hundred lashes on the bare back,' besides a for- 
feiture of all property found in their possession, one third ' to 

* •'Publicly take up with." The possibility of a legal marriage 
with a slave seems not to have been recognized. The union was only 
" a taking up icith" a phrase used among slaves. 



422 APPENDIX. 

go to the light horsemen' who apprehended them, and two 
thirds ' to be applied to some beneficial purpose.' 

" The most objectionable enactment, says Mr. Treat, which he 
found, having any bearing upon slavery, was approved October 
15th, 1840. It is as follows : 

" ^Be it enacted, c£c., That no negro slave can be emancipated 
in this Nation except by apphcation or petition of the owner to 
the General Council ; and provided also, that it shall be made 
to appear to the Council the owner or owners, at the time of 
application, shall have no debt or debts outstanding against him 
or her, either in or out of this Nation. Then, and in that case, 
the General Council shall have the power to pass an act for the 
o^Tier to emancipate his or her slave, which negro, after being 
freed, shall leave this nation within thirty days after the passage 
of the Act. And in case said free negro or negi'oes shall return 
into this Nation afterwards, he, she, or they shall be subject to be 
taken by the light horsemen and exposed to public sale for the 
term of five years ; and the funds arising fi'om such sale shall 
be used as national funds.' " 



LIST OF EEPORTED CASES 



CITED IX THIS VOLUME. 



Allan vs. Young, (LS^188 

Banks, Admr., -us. Marksbury, 70 

Bdzzy vs. Rose and child, (Lou.) 149 

Beatley vs. Judy, (Ky.) 70 

Beall vs. Joseph, (Ky.) 348 

Berard vs. Berard et al., (Lou.) 241, 

295 
Bore vs. Bush, (Lou.) 318 
Brandon et al. vs. Merchants' and 

Planters' Bank, (Ala.) 92, 293 
Butler IS. Boardinan, (Md ) 278 
Bynam vs. Bostwick, (S. C.) 29, 293 

Carroll et al. vs. Connet, (Ky.) 71 
Commonwealth (Va.) vs. Carver, 194, 

204 
Commonwealth (Mass.) vs. Aves, 262 
Cooke (r.olored) vs. Cooke, (Ky.) 350 
Cornl'ute vs. Dale, (.Md.) 202 
Crawford vs. Cheney, (La.) 205 

Davis vs. Curry, (Ky.) 238 

Davis vs. Sandford, (Ky.) 274 

Delphine vs. Devise, (La.) 650 

Dolly Chappie, (Va.) 194 

Dorothee vs. Coquillon, (La.) 125, 158, 

242 
Dunbar vs. WjUiams, (N. Y.) 148 

Enlaws t>s. Enlaws, (Ky.) 71 
Emmersoii vs. Ilowland, 93 

Fields vs. State ofTenn., 195 
Free Lucy vs. Frank, 93 

George et al. vs. Corse, (Md.l 345 
Glen vs. Hodges, (N. Y.) 235 
Glvens vs. Mann, (Va.) 349 
Girod vj. Lewis, (Lou.) 107, 293-4 
Gumez vs. Bonneval, vLou.) 260 



Hall vs. Mullen. (Md.) 91, 93, 264, 349 ' 
Hamilton vs. Cragg (Md.) 349 — 
Harris vs. Clarissa et-al., (Tenn.) 30 
Harvey et al vs. Decker and Hopkins, 

(Miss.) 262, 264 
Hilton vs. Caston, '68 
Hudgens vs. Wrights, (Va.) 263,273-4, 

296 
Hutchins vs. Lee, (Miss.) 235 

Icar vs, Suars, (La.) 32 

Jarrett vs. Higbec, (Ky.) 102 
•Tennings I's. Furderburg, (S. C.) 188-9 
Johnson et al. vs. Barrett, (S. C.) 149 
Jourdan rs. Patten, (La.) 205 

Kittletas vs. Fleet, (\. Y.) 347 

Labranche vs. Watkins, (La.) 235 
Lewis vs. FuUerton, (Va.) 349 
Lunsfordfs. Coquillon, (La.) 261-2 

Markham vs. Close, (La.) 187, 195 
Marie Louisa vs. Marriott et al. (La.) 

261-2 
Maria vs. Surbach, (Va.) 278 
Mary vs. Morris et al., 'Lou.) 349 
McCutchen et al. vs. Marshall et al., 

(U. S.) 278 
May vs. Brown and Boisseau, (Va.) 

203-1 
Metayer vs. Metayer, (Lou.) 266 
.Moosa vs. AUain, (Lou.) 350. 

Negro Tom, (N. Y.) 348 ■^ 

Negro Cato vs. Howard (Md.) 349 
Negro George et al. vs. Corse, iMd.) 
345 

People vs. Lervy, 93 



42-i 



IJST OF REPORTED CASES. 



Plumpton vs. Cook, (Ky.) 70 
Prigg vs. Pennsylvania, (U. S.) 168 

Rankin vs. Lydia. (Ky ) 467 
Richardson i'^. Dukes, (S. C.) 189 

Sawnev vs. Carter, (Va ) 347, 349 
Scidmo're vs. Smith, 205, 236 
Seville vs. Chretien (La.> 263-^, 266 
SimsWhite rs. James Chambers,(S. C.) 

1 68, 202-3 
Smith vs. Rowzce, 51 
Smith vs Hancock, (Ky.) 204 
Somerset, James, (slave) 259 
State 01 Miss. vs. Jones, 192, 204 
" N. J. vs Waggoner, 28, 265 
" N. C. IS. Mann, 32, 79, 126, 
154, 1R9, 204 
vs. Reed, 19 1 
vs. Hale, 192, 204,207 
vs. Ben, 317 
vs. Jim, 317 
vs. Charity, 317 



State of S. C. vs. Maner, 453, 193, 204 
" " vs. Cheatwood, 168, 191, 

204 
" " rs. E.Smith and R.Smith, 

190 
" " vs. Raines, 190 
" " vs. McGee, 211 
" " vs. Hannah Elliott, 233, 

277 
" " vs. Davis and Hanna, 277 
" Va. vs. Career, 194, 204 
Stevenson vs. Singleton, (Va.) 347, 349 

Tate vs. O'NeiU, (N. C.) 203 

Vaughan vs. Phebe, (Tenn.) 266 
Victoire vs. Dissua, (Lou.) 349 

Wells vs. Kennerly, (S. C.) 149 
Westell rs. Earnest and Parker, (S.C.) 

189 
White vs. Chambers, (S. C.) 168, 202-3 
Will vs. Thompson, 348 



GENERAL INDEX. 



Advertisements : 

Slaves sold for distribution, T5 
" wanted bj- dealers, 54 
" for sale by dealers, 54-5 
" taken, and tor sale for debt, 

66-7 
" " acclimated," for sale, 81-2 
" "breeder" for sale, 84 
" '• damaged" wanted, 87 
" fugitives in search of their 
families, 119 
Reward for evidence to convict a 
mother of the crime of " harbor- 
ing" her son, 119 
Of a wife in search of her hus- 
band, 119 
Reward oflercd for killing a slave 
for running ofl" with his wife, 120 
Describing fugitives scarred, bran- 
ded, cropped, shot, ic, 219-20 
" Nesro dogs" and slave hunting, 

236-7 
" White" slaves, 284-5 
Agricultural Societies, Southern, (testi- 
mony of,) 81 
Alabama : slaves ill clothed, 146 ; le- 
galized slave discipline, 165 ; laws 
is. harboring fugitives. 233 ; mode of 
testing cl.dms to freedom, 299 ; laws 
vs. preaching, 322 ; laws vs. emanci- 
pation, 341-3 
Alarm at negroes reading, 33G 
Alexandria, (D. C.) coroner's inquest, 

181 
Allan, Rev. Wm. T., (Testimonv,) 39, 

148, 312 
Am. Bible Soc and slave families, 115 
Amer. Colonization Soc. (See Coloni- 
zation Soc ) 
Ameliorations impracticable, 293 
Ancient slavery, '• }>erulium." 96 
An aunt in Court, claiming nieces as 

slaves ot'ntlirr nieces, 241-2 
Appendix A. Fugitive Slave Bill, 409 
" B, Cherokecs and Choc- 

taws, 417 



Archer, Judge, 345 

Avery, George A.,(Testimony,) 148,214, 
216 

Badger, Judge, 317 

Baltimore Advertiser, (Testimony, )142 

Baptism of slaves, 253, 332 

Battery on a sKive, 32. &c., 168-9, 192 

Betting on a negro's life, in a fit, 40 

Berry, Mr. (Va.) Testimony, 323 

Bibb, Judae, 103 

Bible prohibited, 321, 324 

Bible Societies do not supply slaves, 

323 
Birney, James G., (Testimony,) 57 
Blackwell, Samuel. (Testimony,) 80 
Bliss, Philemon, (Testimony,) 143-4 
Bourne, Rev. Geo., (Testimony,) 111, 

141 
Boudinot, Tobias, (Testimony,) 141 
Boiildin, lion. T. T., (Testimony,) 145 
Bovle, Judge, 275 
Oranding slaves, 219-20 
Breckenridge, Dr. R. J., (Testimony,) 

308 
Breckenbrough, Judge, 194 
" Breeders," '30, 55, 84-5 
Brougham, Lord. " No property in 

man," 270 
Brodnax, Mr., (Va.) 367 
Bucnanan, Dr. Geo., (Testimony,) 145, 

222 
Butler, Gov., (S. C.) 210 
Burning and beheading a slave, 118 
" a free negro, 316 

Calhoun, John C, (Testimony,) 285 
Carey, Matthew, (Testimony,) 211 
Catechisms '■ incendiary," 336 
Caul kins.Nehemiah, (Testimonv,) 142-3 
Charles V., 267 

Charleston, (S. C). Bap. Asso. 37-8, 40 
" " Observer, (Testi- 

mony,") 335 
Channing, Dr. Wm. E., (Testimony,) 
148 



426 



IX])EX. 



Chattel principle, 23, 20 

Choulcs, Rev. J. O., (Testimony,) 133 

Cherokee slave laws, 417 

Choctaw slave laws, 420 

Clay, Henry, on slave property, 34, 349 
'• slave trallic, 48, 55 

" slave breedjnjr. f>4 

" overtasking. 132 

" slaves "fal and sleek," 

152 
" perpetuity of slavery, 

249, 272 
" future slavery of 

whites. 283' 

Clay, Thomas, (Testimony,) 141-3 

Clarke, Judge, 192 

Claims to freedom, 295 

Clothin,"; of slaves, 145, <S;c. 

Code Noir, its comparative mildness, 
44-5. 68, 75 

Colcock, Judge, IS9, 190 

Colonial Slavery, 2ti0, &c. 

Color defined, 277 

" presumptive of slaverv, 276-7, 
295 

Colored testimony excluded, 300, &e. 

Colored seamen imprisoned, 302 

Colored people, (See " Free People of 
Color.'") 

Colonization Society vs. manumission 
on soil, 351 ; oriiiin and olijects ol, 
364 ; meetings, eflects of, 366 ; com- 
pulsion, 267 ; Maryland Soc, 309-70 ; 
N Y. State Auxiliarv, 305 ; American. 
(Testimony of,) 222' 

Connecticut, slave marriage, 106 

Contracts of master and slave void, 
346, <fcc. 

Constitutiims (-tate) I's. Abolition, 350 

Congress, U. S. vs. slsves' personality, 
106 ; right of petition, 37 ; Fugitive 
Slave Bill, 168, 234, 409 

Cornelius, Rev. Elias, (Testimonv,) 
148 

Cost, perannum, of slaves' support, 153 

Cousins in Court, claiming cousins as 
slaves, 24 1 

Crancli, Judge, (Testimony,) 360; peti- 
tion, 56 

Crandall, Prudence, 366 

Cra/.iness or idiocy of slave property 
sold and warranted, 32 

Crenshaw, Judge, 293 

Criminal prosecutions to defend slave 
property, 192, 204 

Cropping ears legal, 220 

Cruelty, certain kinds, authorized, 159 
" philosophy of, 223-1 

Daggett, Judge. 360 
Damaged slaves, uses of. 66-7 
Damages to slave properly, 201, <tc. 
Dayton, Col. ^M. C.i 36 



•' Dead or alive" to be returned, 120 

Death from nakedness, 145 

" starvation, 141, 145 

" " moderate correction," T80 

Delegated power of overseers, i97, <tc., 
204 

Delaware, laws to prevent escapes, 229 

Di-ming, Dr . (Testimony,) 79 

Derbigny, Judge, 280 

Dew, Prof, (Testimony.) 64 

District of Columbia, slave-trade, 57 ; 
slaves may not traffic, 100 ; free ne- 
groes sold, 227 ; killing authorized, 
230-1 

Distribution of slave estates, 74-5 

Dorsey, Judge, 345 

Dower of widows in slaves, 71-2, 346 

Drunkenness of slave property sold and 
warranted, 31 

Dwellings of slaves described, 147 

Earl, Judge, 345 

Education, slaves no right to, 251 
" " prohibited, 319 

Edwards, Dr. Jonathan, (Testimony,) 

141 143, 221 ; accounted slavehold- 

ing man-stealing, 271 
Erwiu. .Mr., (Ala.) slave-trader, 59 

Facts, rcatment of slaves, 209. &c. 
Family relation, slaves', 113, <fcc. 
Fine for killinira negro, 191 
Fisher, Mr., (Va.) Testimony, 308 
Florida, clothing of slaves, )46 

" laws to prevent escapes, 229 
" Florida Slaveholder," (Testimony,) 

370; his liberties, 376 
Food, clothing, shelter. 135. &c. 
Free people of color sold for jail fees, 

227 • enslaved, 274, 352 ; liberties of, 

355, &c 
Free worship forbidden. 326 
French slavery, milder type. 45 
Fugitive slave?. 225, &c.', 227 
Fugitive Slave Bill (of 1650,) 263-4,409 
Furman, Rev. Dr., sale of theological 

books and negroes, 38 

Gadsden, T. N., Esq., slave auctioneer, 

60 
Georgetown, (D. C."> ordinance, 358 
Georgia, Presh. Synod, (Testimony,) 
III; slaves forbidden to traflic, 96 ; 
slaves' labor, 1.30 ; food. i36; cloth- 
ing, 145; murder, 162-3; "mode- 
rate correction," 163; slave with- 
out " pass," 226 ; harboring, 232 ; 
slavery perpetual and hereditary, 
249 ; origin, 260 ; free negroes en- 
slaved, 276: claims to freedom, 
297-8 ; punished if fails to prove free- 
dom, 297 ; death to strike white per- 
son, 305 ; penal laws vs. slaves, 315 ; 



INDEX. 



427 



education prohibited, 319-22 ; no free 
worship, 328; vs. emancipation, 341, 
342; whites fined lor teachiii!;, 35'J ; 
restriction on right of hiring liouses, 
361 ; quarantine of freedom, 303 ; no 
freedom of speech or of the press, 
3Sa 

Gholson, Mr., (Va.) 30-1, 3G, 55, S2, 
84, 272 

Gildersleeve, W. C, (.Testimony,) 142, 
144 

Gillmore, Mary, white, Irish, enslaved, 
285 

Girls, mulatto, high price, 85-6 

Grand Jury of Ch'sraw, (S. C.) Testi- 
mony, 2 1 1 

Greenville ( S. C ) Mountaineer, (Testi- 
mony,) 33G 

Grimke, Sarah M., (Testimony,) 115, 
148, 154, 256 

Ground of slaves' civil condition, 289 

Hall, Judge, 193, 317 

Hampton,' Gen Wade, feeding slaves, 

cottonseed. '41-2, 218 
Harboring fugitives, 232-3. 236 
Hawley, Rev. Francis, (Testimony,) 

213 
Hawkins, Sir John, 258, 271 
Hayne, Gov. R. Y., purchased a man's 

wife and children, 119 
Hehrew servitude. 232 
Hereditary and perpetual slavery, 248 
Hill, John W., (Testimony, 214-15 
History of S C , i Testimony,) 132 
Hitchcock, Judge H., (Ala.) concerned 

in slave-trade. 59. 175 
Home .Mission, Meth.. put down, 336-T 
Honesty of slave property sold and 

warranted, 32 
House slaves, their condition, 111,117, 

200 
Humanity punished more than cruelty, 

1(53 
Huncer of slaves, 141 
Hunting slaves, 234 
Huntsman. Hon. Adam, 386 
Hymn books, incendiary, 324 

111 treatment, no legal remedy for, 125, 
242-3 

Illegal importation of slaves, 2G0, &c. 

Imprisonment ofslaves by owner, 166-7 

Increase of slaves, 70, 72 ; belong to 
ulterior legatee, 72 ; may be sold by 
Orphans' Court, 72 ; subject to mort- 
gage, 64-5 

Infants cannot be emancipated, (Md ) 
349 

Indians enslaved, 28, 267-8, 282, 298 

Indiana excludes colored witnesses, 
359 

Inheritance of slave property, 69 



Intermarriase with slaves, 278 
Iron collars, according to law, 163 

Jackson, Gen. Andrew, a slave-trader, 

00 
Jamaica, (W. 1 1 mixed breed free, 249 
Jeflerson, Thomas, 34, 38, 126-7, 218; 

his will, 276, 375 ; his daughter sold, 

85 ' 

Johnson, Col. Richard M., 378-9 
Johnson, Judge, 94, 149, 264 
Jones, Rev. C. C, of Geo., .Testimony,) 

335 
Judson, A. T., 336 
Judiciary perverted, 207 
Jury trial, why denied, 261 

Kentucky : slaves real estate, 24 ; but 
sold as chattels, 24 ; Presb. Synod, 
(Testimony,) 53, 55,110, 222, 333; 
slaves may not traffic, 98 no • hire 
out, 103 ; nor carry weapons, 229 ; 
free colored degraded, 300 : laws vs. 
slaves, 312-15 ; hopeless ignorance, 
323-4 ; laws is. emancipation, 343 

Kidnapping, 279 

Knowledge, incendiary, 337 

Labor of .slaves, 78. 128, &c.. 150, <tc. 

Ladd, William, (Testimony,) 142, 146 

L.idy advertising a fugitive wi/e in 
search of her husband, 119 

Leftwich, Wm., (Testimony,) 144, 146 

Legality of slavery, 19, 262, <tc. 

Legislation, none creating slavery, 
261, <fce. 

Lewis Lillburn, his barbarity, 88 

Lexington iKy.) Luminary, (^Testi- 
mony,) 111 

Liberty of free people of color, 355, <fcc. 
" of whites at the South, 372, &c. 
" of whites at the North, 3S9 

License to marry emancipates, 106 

Licentiousness produced by slavery, 
111 

Life of slave in his owner's hands, 125 
'• taken without jury, 314 

Littleton, Lord, 20, 401-2 

Louisiana : property tenure of slaves, 
23 ; held as real estate, 24 ; war- 
ranty of slaves, 31 ; ameliorated 
code, 46 ; allows a peniUum, 90 ; 
slave families, 114; law of slaves' 
labor, 139; food, clothing, <fcr., 135; 
of punishm;'nts, 161 ; iron collars 
authorized. 163 ; overseer's author- 
ity, 198 ; damages to slave property, 
2<J3 ; slaves on horseback, 229 ; relief 
from ill treatment, 246 ; penal laws 
vs. slaves, 314-15; vs. free speech 
and press, 322 ; religious privileges 
of slaves, 332 ; vs. emancipation, 



428 



INDEX. 



213-4 ; subjection of free blacks to 

whites, 357 
Lowry, Nancj', (Testimony,) 213 
Lynch Committee, i^Mo.; 316 

Madison, James, sister of, (Testimony,") 
111 

Madison, James, denied the right of 
properly in man, 270 

Malthv, S E., iTestimonv,) 14G 

Mansfield, Lord, 259, 270 

Marriage of slaves abrogated, 105, &c. 
•' of whites restricted, 376, &c. 

Martinique, comparative lenity shown 
to slaves, 45 

Martin, Judge, 262, 248 

Maryland : chattel tenure, 25 ; issue of 
female slaves, 30 ; bequests to slaves 
void, 91 ; slaves may not tr;itRc, 99 ; 
naked and starved, 145 ; damajes to 
slave properly, 202 ; whites and 
blacks required'To have "passes," 
227-8; slaves rambling or riding, 
229 ; killing slaves authorized, 230 ; 
slavery hereditary and perpetual, 
248 ; enslaving white women and 
their children, 273 ; emancipated ne- 
groes reenslaved, 275, 359 ; trial of 
claims to freedom, 298 ; cropping 
free blacks, 306 ; penal laws rs. 
slaves, 2i3 — 16 ; laws of emancipa- 
tion, 343 ; relig. privileges of slaves, 
322 

Mason, Mr., (Va.) 261 

Massachusetts, submission to slave 
law, 363 

Matthews, Judge, (La.) 107, 188, 206, 
264, 266-7-8, 293 

Meade, Bishop, (Testimony,) 334 

'• .Merciful safety-valve," 133-4 

Meth. E. Church, exclusion of colored 
witnesses, 159 ; class imprisoned, 
220 ; missions suppressed, 336, 383 

Miner, Mr., (M. C.) (Testimony,) 361 

Ministry for slaves, 334 

Mississippi: slave importation, 48; 
constitutional power of Legislature 
to relieve ill-treated slaves, not exer- 
cised, 108, 246 ; enslaves free ne- 
groes, 276 ; penal laws vs. slaves, 
312-13 ; free worship forbidden, 331 ; 
laws rs. emancipation, 341-3 ; ex- 
pulsion of free colored people, 356 ; 
no freedom of speech or of the press, 
385. 

Missouri: sl.ives may not traffic, 99; 
laws concerning cruelty, 165, ikc. ; 
masters may imprison slaves, 166-7 ; 
slaves forbidden weapons, 229 ; test- 
ing claims to freedom, 299 ; Lynch 
law, burning free negro, 316; no 
freedom of speech or of the press, 
386 



Missionarv Society put down, 336 

Mixed race, 380, &c. 

".Moderate correct ion," "death under," 
180 

Mortgage of slaves, 24, 63-4 

Moseiy, Rev. Mr., (Conn.) sale of wife 
from husband, 114 

Mother (free) cannot sue for relief of a 
slavedaughtcr from ill treatment, 125 

.Moullon, Horace, (Testimony,) 142-3 

Municipal law, i slavery under, ) 262, &c. 

Murders of slaves, law of, 177, &c. ; 
frequency of, 210 ; instances of, 210 — 
12, <fec. ; of a slave child, 88 ; im- 
punity of white murderers, 88, 210 ; 
doubts of Judges whether the murder 
of a slave be indictable, 192, 194; 
murders punished to protect slave 
property, 192-3 ; virtually commuted 
for a verdict for pecuniary damages, 
208 

" Negro's head" advertised, 39 

Negro pew, 370 

"Negro dogs" (for slave hunting) ad- 
vertised, 336-7 

New- Jersey, Indians enslaved, 28, 266 

New-Orleans Argus, i Testimony.) 81 

New-Orleans Bee, (Testimony,) 285 

New-Orleans Picavune, (Teslimonv,) 
383 

New-Orleans Bible Society disclaims 
the intention of giving Bibles to 
slaves, 383 

Nieces suing their aunt for their free- 
dom, 241-2 

Niles" Register, (Testimony,) 285 

No appeal of a slave from his master, 
120 

No prosecution for battery on a slave, 
171 

No right of redemption from slavery, 
245 

No access to judiciary, 295, <tc. 

No statutes creating slavery, 258, 
268, <tc. 

North Carolina Baptist Convention, 
I Testimony.) 336 

North Carolina; law of slave legacies, 
69, 70 ; " slaves cannot take by de- 
scent," (tc, 91 ; may not traffic, 
98-9 ; law of food, clothing. Ac, 
130 ; of killing slaves, 180.'^ 230-1 ; 
outlawry of, 180 ; damages to slave 
property, 203 ; slaves without pass, 
229 ; enslaving free colored persons, 
276 ; no freedom of speech or of the 
press, 385; freedom quarantined, 
363 ; penallaw8!'.s-.slaves.312-I.V14 ; 
education prohibited, 321 ; Bibles for- 
bidden, 324 ; laws t'.v. emancipation, 
341 ; preaching forbidden, 358; free 
colored people legally plundered. 



INDEX. 



429 



359 ; expatriation or rccnslavcment, 
301 

Obsolete, slave laws not, 20 
Obstructions to emancipation, 275, 

338, &c. 
Oliio, black law, 359 
O'Niell, Judge, 1C8 
«' Oral instruction," 324-5, 336 
Origin of the " legal relation," 258 
Ottley, Chief Justice, 302 
Ouachita (La.) Register, (Testimony,) 

237 
Outlawry of slaves, 180 
Overseers : their power, 197 ; their 

character, 200 

Parrish, John, (Testimony,) 145 

Patrols, regulation of, 329 

Paxton. Mr., (Testimony.) 285 

Pec!(//!(?n of slaves, 26, 90 

Peg, slave, damaged, 52 

Penal laws vs. slaves, 309, &c. 

Persecution for religion, 250, 282 

Pickens, Mr., (M. C. 37 

Piety of slaves advertised for sale, 42 

Pinckney, lion. II. L., sale of a man's 

wife and children, 119 
Pinckney and Ford, (Testimony,) 211 
Pincknev, William, (Testimony,) 221 
Pitt, William, 259 

Portuguese slaverv, milder type of, 45 
Powell, Eleazer, (Testimony.) 143 
Prcsby. Church, Gen. Assembly, funds 
loaned and used in slave-trade, 62 ; 
definition of man-stealing, 271 ; Syn- 
od of Ky. (Testimony,) 53, 55, 110, 
222, 333 ; Synod of S. C. and Geo., 
(Testimony,) 111, 334 
" Prescription" no valid foundation 

lor slaveholding, 266-7 
Priestley, Dr., maxim of, 17 
Protection of slaves in fact, 209, &c. 
Property in a slave adjudged para- 
mount to the slave's right to life, 
317-18 
Punishment of slaves by masters, 
155, &c. 

Quakers of N. Carolina, emancipation 

by, 352 
Quarantine of freedom, 363 

Randolph, Thos. J., (Testimony,) 56 
Randolph, John, (Testimony,) 217 

" will of, 146 
Rankin, Rev. John, (Testimony,) 141, 

145 
Rape of female slave, no protection 

against, 86 
Reed, Rev. Dr., (Testimony,) 80 
Relation of slave to Society, 287 
Religious liberty of slaves, 251, &c., 

326, &c. 



Religious Avorship prohibited, 326 
UcnslKiw, Rev. S. C, (Testimony,) 

143, 14fi 
Revolutionary service of slave, bounty 

belongs to his ma.sier, 93-4 
Roane, Judge, 290 
Robinson, .ludgo, (Ky.) 71 
Roman Civil Law, 25-6, 156, 264 
Rufiin, Judge, (of N. C.) 32, 79, 126, 

154, 156, 165, 170, 317 

Sabbath-schools for slaves, 324 
Sale of slaves, 23, 25, 54, C6-7 
Saflbrd, Judge, 91 

Sapington, L., (Testimony,) 118, 127 
Savery, William, (Testimony,) 145 
Savannah River Dap. Asso. vs. mar- 
riage, 109, 127. 258 
Savannah City Ordinance vs. Schools, 

321 
Schools broken up, 320, &c., 366 
Self-defense not allowed, 306-7 
Separation of families, 53 ; exceptions 

to this, 73 
Severity not caused by abolitionists, 

20 
Sharp, Granville, 259 
Sheritis obey orders of slaveholders, 

167 
Seizure of slaves for debt, 63 
Slaves : not considered men, 35-7 ; 
no right of petition, 37 ; devisable, 
like other chattels, 72 ; can own 
nothing, 89, &c. ; can make no con- 
tract, 93 ; can be agents for their 
masters, 94-5 ; no crime to gamble 
with them, 95 ; laws forbidding thern 
to hold property, 96 ; may not traf- 
fic, 95-7 ; nor hire out, 98 ; nor 
marry, 105 ; nor constitute families, 
113; nor control their children, 
113-:7, 198; nor appeal from mas- 
ter, 126 ; cost of their support, 153 ; 
aged sent out to beg, 153-4 ; punished 
at will, 155 ; cannot testify, 159 ; im- 
prisoned by owners, 166-7 ; battery 
of them, by owners, no breach of the 
peace, 168; not even by shooting, 
170 ; laws concerning murder of, 
177 ; outlawry, of, 180 ; controlled by 
overseers and by children, 198 ; how 
protected, as property, 201-7 ; brand- 
ed, cropped, shot, 2 19-20, 231 ; cannot 
sue master, 239 ; no right of redemp- 
tion, 245 ; nor of education, 251 ; 
nor of religion, 251 ; whipped to 
death for religion, 256 ; follow con- 
dition of slave mother, 273-4 ; civil 
condition, 289; no access to judiciary, 
295 ; whipped by law for failing to 
sustain suit for freedom, 297 ; sub- 
jection to all while persons, 305 ; 
self-defense not allowed to colored 



430 



INDEX. 



persons, 30G-7; penal laws vs. slaves, 
3U9 ; slave hunts. 231-4. 

Slavelioliiers may not allow slaves to 
traiiio or hold property, 97, <S;c ; 
autliority of, 1G2 ; rights not to be 
quesilioned in Courts, 173 ; self-in- 
terest does not protect the slave, I'J5 ; 
not bound to show title to a slave 
claiming freedom. 241-2 ; do not en- 
joy civil and religious liberty, 372, 
&c. 

Smith, Dr. A. G., (Testimony,) 143 

Smythe.Gen. Alexander, (Testimony,) 
132, 141 

Smylie, Rev. James, (Testimony,) 50, 
58 

Somerset, James, (slave) case, 259 

South Carolina: chattel tenure, 23; 
warranty of slaves, 31-2 ; slaves can 
own notliiiiff, 01 ; rnay not traffir, 97 ; 
law of labor, 128-9 ; of food and 
clothing, 137 ; laws respecting cru- 
elty, 159, 178,301 ; damages to slave 
proi)erty, 202-3 ; slaves without pass, 
228-9 ; enticing slaves, 232 ; perpe- 
tuity of slavery, 218 ; imprisonment 
of colored seamen, 362 ; laws vn. 
emancii)ation,341 ; testing claims to 
freedom, 297 ; owner exculpated by 
oath, 301 ; death for striking white 
person, 305-6 ; penal laws vs. slaves, 
312-15 ; education prohibited, 319, 
&c., 329 ; Methodist Missions sup- 
pressed, 33G 

Spanish slaverv, milder type of, 45, 
101, 131,247,292,250, 344 

Spiritual despotism, 124-5, 251, &e. 

'• Statu libiT," no relief for ill treat- 
ment of, 125 

Stewart, Mr., (111.) Testimony, 58 

Stone, A. A., (Testimony,) 133, 141 

Story's '"Conllict of Laws," 262 

Subjects of slavery, 251, &c. 

Sugar plantations " use up" slaves, 60 

Summers, Mr. (Va.) 35 

Swain, Wm. and Moses, (Testimony,) 
141 

Taylor, Judge, 192 

Tennessee: slaves may not traffic, 
98; ill clothed, 145; law on killing 
slaves, 182, and see N. Carolina, 
180 ; slaves without pass, 229 ; penal 
laws vs. slaves, 312-15 ; laws vs. 
emancipation, 342-3 ; expatriation 
laws, 356 

Testimony excluded, 159, 300, &c. 

Thome, Rev. James A., (Testimony,) 
223 

Torrey, Dr., (Testimony,) 285 

Traffic in slaves. 44, 4:c. 

Treatment of sick, inlirm, and aged, 
147-9 



Tucker, Judge, (Testimony,) 237-8 
Turner, L , (Testimony,) 38, 2 3 
Turpin, Mr., (.Missionary,; 336, 363 

Unlimited power, 27, 122 

" Unlawful assemblies,*' 204-5 

" Unusual punishments" prohibited, 

161, &c. ; delined, 162, Ac. 
" Used up" in live to eight years, 133-4 
Uses of slave property, 77, &c. 

Vanderpool, lion. .Mr., 36 

" Verbal instruction" for slaves, 324, 
336 

Violence to female chastity, 220 

Virginia ; slaves chattels, 24 ; may not 
tralfic, 98; sold for trading, 'lOl ; 
clothing of slaves, ; 145-6 ; dam- 
ages to slave property, 203-4 ; 
weapons forbidden, 229 ; killing law- 
fully, 231 ; " literary fund," from sale 
of emancipated negroes, 275-6 ; test- 
ing claims to freedom, 298 ; attorneys 
fined for pleading, if suit fails, 298 ; 
free colored persons striking white 
persons, 306 ; penal laws i^s. slaves, 
313-15; education prohibited, 320; 
religious worship forbidden, 330-1 ; 
emancipation laws, 341-3; no free- 
dom of speech or of the press, 3S5 

Wages, .slaves receive none, 150 
Wall, Col., (Ky.) Senator and slave 

dealer, 59, 60 
Warranty of slaves sold, 31-2 
Washington Citv Corporation, 227 
Waugh, Bisliop,'3G9 
Weld, Angelina Orimke, (Testimony,) 

03, 116, 127, 144 
Western Medical Reformer, (Testi- 
mony,) 143 
Western Luminary, (Testimony,) 335 
Weslgate, G. W., (Testimony,)' 146 
West Indies, (llrit.) slavery was illegal, 
270 ; free colored people less op- 
pressed, 372 
Wesley, John, on '• men-stealers," 271 
Wheeler's criticism on Siroud exam- 
ined, 184-5 
White men on plantations required, 

302 
White persons enslaved, 282 
White women marrying slaves, 273 
White poor supported by colored poor, 

99 
Whitefield. Rev. George. (Testimony,) 

131,141,221 
Wife no right to manumit, 346 
Wills, of personal estates, embrace 
slaves, 70 ; may bequeath unborn 
slaves, and separate the future " in- 
crease" from the mother, 70 ; for 
emancipation, set aside, 344-5, &c. 



INDEX. 



431 



Wi' t, Wm., Attorney-Gen., his opinion 
of certain laws, 362 ; his description 
of overseers, 200 

Wilmington, (N. C.) 100, 226 

Wise, Hon. Mr., 30, 106 



Wives of slaves appropriated by their 
owners, 118 

Woman, with infant, at work on planta- 
tion, 118 

VVoolinan, John, (Testimony,) 114, 
132, 142, 145, 222, 323 



JCrST PUBLISHED, 

SLAYEPiY AXD AXTI-SLAYERY 

A 

History of the Great Straggle in both Hemispheres ; 

WITH A VIEW OF THE SLAVERY QUESTION IN THE UNITED 
STATES. 

BY WILLIAJI GOODELL: 

AoTHoR o» •■ Thb Dimocract or Chkistianitt." 



This work is designed to embody a preat amount of historical information in 
a single volume, conveniently arranged Ibr reference. It contains fifty chapters 
on as many distinct topics, embracmg the most important fiicts in the political 
and ecclfsiastiral history of the contest, together with an account of the Anti- 
slaver)- agitiition in England and the United States, up to the present time ; the 
divisions among American Abolitionists, and the various measures advocated 
among them ; and closing with a brief discussion of the question, ' What 
ought to be done .'" The booli is an abstract of several volumes, besides the 
Ami-slavery history of the last twenty years, a great part of which has never 
before been collected into any volume, but lies scattered in the newspapers of 
thai period. The Table of Contents and a copious Alphabetical Index will 
facilitate a reference to particular facts, and to dates when desirable. 

It is a large royal ]2mo volume, of about si.\ hundred pages, well printed, on 
handsome paper, neatly bound in cloth, and lettered. Price One Dollar per copy, 
at retail ; $9 per dozen, or $05 per hundred, to booksellers and book pedlars for 
cash. 

The postage on a single copy will be 30 cents to any part of the United States, 
and mvst be pre paid. 

For sale at the Office of the American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, 48 
Beckman street, New-York. 

Tlie work has been favorably noticed in the yew-York Independent, yew- 
York Kvaiicrelht, yew-Vork Advocate and Guardian, Cleveland True Demo- 
crat, Frederick Douglass's Pnpir, and other periodicals. 



THE DEMOCRACY OF CHRISTIANITY, 

OR, 

An Analysis of the Bible and its Doctrines, in their Relation to the 
Principle of Democracy. 

BY WILLIAM GOODELL. 

In 2 vols. 12mo. New-York, Cady & Bvroess. Sold at the Office of the 
American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, 48 Beekman street. New- York. 
Price $1.50 at retail, $12 per dozen, and $90 per hundred, for cash. 

Recommended by the yew-York Tribune, American Statesman. Democratic 
Rcvifir. Ob(rlin Ei'aiiSflist, Ohio Star, Boston Chronoti/pe. and other periodicals. 
Also by Rev. Dr. .\ydelott, Cincinnati ; Hon. Amasa Walker, of Massachusetts ; 
Professor T. B. Hudson, of Oberlin ; Gerril Smith, of Pcterboro", New- York, etc. 



iVlAY27lcM<J 



\j ^ , o ^Cy;, t> ■- <^ ^. »^ ^VA *^ r I© <5i *^ 









-o ' ' « . ^ ^ \^^ 95^ ' 0^*" 9j, 















■^> nS 



o,^' 















\V U. ' o I, ■- \V 












•r 






&\\::yr%, 



i^ 9<> 






^^^ 









■ ^\''"' <^^ cP 









^^>^S£-E^> 









^ao< 















-^ ' ' o o "- "■ A^ 



^ ' 4 ft ^ A <* ' 






0^ .'-.^ 'c <t^ 



3^ 9^ 












'■\.^^'/ ,'%.// :,"\.^^''/ 



%.x^^ 









% .x^' 



